Skip to main content
Internet Archive's 25th Anniversary Logo

Full text of "Journal Of Egyptian Archaeology Vol.27"

See other formats







^ C'S ^ 

■ CALL No. '^/A ■ 

^.ioS / T'l'' ■ /) ^ 

j. ^ 











Price to non-members 505. or Sio.oo 




The Editor 




Battiscombe Gunn 



numents made a Hundred 

Rosalind Moss ... 



R. 0. Faulkner 


Taxation and Transport 

Alan H. Gardiner 




IVIiDDLF Kingdom 

Paul C. Smither... 


LL No. J. P-A 

Formula in the Middle 

C, J. C. Bennett 


Kief of the Meshwesh 

A. M. Blackman 


k. 79 . 


N. M. and N. de G. 



A Greek Epigram from Egypt . . 

Marcus N. Tod 


Inn in Late Egyptian 

Jaroslav Cerny ... 


The Tunic of Tut<ankhamun 

G. M. Crowfoot and N. 

de G. Davies ... 


A Ramesside Love Charm 

Paul Smither 


The Hieroglyph for the Fledgling 

Nina M. Davies 


The Tukh El-Karamus Gold Hoard 

J. G. Milne 


The Attempted Sacrifice of Sesostris 

G. A. Wainwright 


Notes on Egyptian Lexicography 

Battiscombe Gunn 


Egyptian Astronomy 

Letters from Dr. Eisler 

and Dr. Chatley 


Bibliography: Graeco-Roman Egypt 

Greek Inscriptions (1939-1940) 

Marcus N. Tod 


Brief Communications: The Use of Red for Amounts of Cereals in Hieratic by Battiscombe 
Gunn, p. 157; The Writing of Htp-Di-Nsw by C. J. C. Bennett, p. 157; Egyptian Sea- 
going Ships: a Correction by R. O. Faulkner, p. 158; The Cow’s Belly by Alan H. Gardiner, 
p. 158; The Tall Story of the Bull by Paul C. Smither, p. 158; The Name of Sesebi by 
A. J. Arkell, p. 159; Big Game Hunters in Ptolemaic and Roman Libya by Marcus N. 
Tod, p. 159; On Medinet Habu Ostracon 4038 by F. M. Heichelheim, p. 161. 

Notes and News 

Reviews and Notices of Recent Publications: 

Bataille, a., Gueraud, O., Jouguet, P., Lewis, N., Marrou, H., Sch^reb, 
J., Waddell, W. G., Publications de la Society Fouad I die Papyrologie. 
Textes et Documents III. Les Papyrus Fouad I Nos. i- sg 

Engberg, R. M., The Hyksos Reconsidered {Studies in Ancient Oriental Civiliza- 
tion, No. 18) 

HEBBELYNCKf, Ad., and VAN Lantschoot, Arn., Bibliothecae Apostolicae 
Vaticanae . . . Codices Coptici, Tomus I : Codices Coptici Vaticani. Recen- 
suenint ... 

Junker, H., Giza II and GUa III 

Kapsomenakis, S. G., Voruntersuchungen zu einer Grammatik der Papyri dev 
nackckristlichen Zeit 

Langton, N. and B., The Cat in Ancient Egypt 

Petropulos, G. a., Papyri Societatis Archaeolo^cae Atheniensis (flpay pare tat 
Tfjs AKoSjifUas 'Adrivojif) ... 

i^iEAUX, C., L*£conomie royale des Besides 

Sethe, K., Vom Bilde zum Buchstaben. Die Enistehung der Sekrift {Vnter- 
suchungen zur Geschichte und Aliertumskunde Agyptens, Bd. XII) 

Spiegex., j., Dse Idee vom Totengertcht in der dgyptischen Religion ... ... 

Turner, E. G., Catalogue of Greek and Lattn Papyri and Ostraca in the Posses- 
sion of the University of Aberdeen 

List of Plates 

List of Illustrations in the Text 



Index of Words, Etc., Discussed 


Reviewed by F. M. Heichelheim ... 176 

,, R. O. Faulkner ... 171 

,, \V. E. Crum ... - • 179 

,, R. O, Faulkner 166 

,, L. R. Palmer i 77 

„ Alan H. Gardiner 173 

„ F. M. Heichelheim .. i 77 

„ H. 1 . Bell ... 174 

,, R. O. Faulkner ... . • 169 

A, W. Shorterf 173 

,, H. G. M. Bass 176 






Egyptian Archaeology 












Tut<ankhamun’s Gold Dagger The Editor i 

Notes on Ammenemes I Battiscombe Gunn ... 2 

Some Rubbings of Egyptian Monuments made a Hundred 
Years ago ... ... ... ... ... ... ... Rosalind Moss ... ... 7 

Egyptian Military Standards ... R. O. Faulkner ... ... 12 

Ramesside Texts relating to the Tax.\tion and Transport 
OF Corn ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... Alan H. Gardiner ... 19 

A Tax- Assessor's Journal of the Middle Kingdom Paul C. Smither 74 

Growth of the Htp - Di-Nsw Formula in the Middle Kingdom C. J. C. Bennett ... 77 

The Stela of Shoshenk, Great Chief of the Meshwesh ... M. Blackman ... 83 

Syrlans in the Tomb of Amunedjeh N. M. and N. de G, 

Davies ... ... ... 96 

A Greek Epigram from Egypt Marcus N. Tod ... 99 

'Inn IN Late Egyptian Jaroslav Cerny io6 

The Tunic of Tutunkh^amun G. M. Crowfoot and N. 

de G. Davies ... ... 113 

A Ramesside Lo\^ Charm Paul Smither 131 

The Hieroglyph for the Fledgling Nina M. Davies ... 133 

The Tukh El-Kar\mus Gold Hoard J. G. Milne 135 

The Attempted Sacrifice of Sesostris G. A. Wainwright ... 138 

Notes ON Egyptian Lexicography Battiscombe Gunn ... 144 

Egyptian Astronomy Letters from Dr. Eisler 

and Dr. Chatley ... 149 

Bibliography : Gr.aeco-Roman Egypt 

Greek Inscriptions (1939-1940) Marcus N. Tod ... 153 

Brief Communications: The Use of Red for Amounts of Cereals in Hieratic by Battiscombe 
Gunn, p. 157; The Writing of Htp-Di-Nsw by C. J. C. Bennett, p. 157; Egyptian Sea- 
going Ships: a Correction by R. O. Faulkner, p. 158; The Cow’s Belly Alan H. Gardiner, 
p. 158; The Tall Stor}^ of the Bull by Paul C. Smither, p. 158; The Name of Sesebi by 
A. J. Arkell, p. 159; Big Game Hunters in Ptolemaic and Roman Libva by Marcus N. 

Tod, p. 159; On Medinet Habu Ostracon 4038 by F. M. Heichelheim, p. 161. 


Notes and News 




Reviews and Notices of Recent Publications: 

Bataille, a., Gueraud, O., Jouguet, P., Lewis, N., 

Marrou, H., Scherer, J., Waddell, W, G., Publications de 
la Societe Fouad I de Papyrologie. Textes et Documents III. 

Les Papyrus Fouad I Nos. 1-89 ... ... ... ... Reviewed by F. M. Heichelheim 

Engberg, R. M., The Hyksos Reconsidered {Studies in Ancient 

Oriental Civilization, No. 18) ... ... ... ... ,, R. O. Faulkner 

HEBBELYNCKf, Ad., and VAN Lantschoot, Arn., Bibliothecae 
Apostolicae Vaticanae . . . Codices Coptici,Tomusl: Codices 

Coptici Vaticani. Recensuerunt ... ... ... ... ,, W. E. Crum 

Junker, H., Giza II and Giza III ,, R. O. Faulkner 

Kapsomenakis, S. G., Voruntersuchungen zu einer Grammatik 

der Papyri der nachchristlichen Zeit ... ... ... ... ,, L, R. Palmer 

Langton, N. and B., The Cat in Ancient Egypt ... ... ,, Alan H. Gardiner 

Petropulos, G. a.. Papyri Societatis Archaeologicae Atheni- 

ensis {IIpayfjiaTeiai rrjg ^AKaSrjfila^ ^Adrjvwv) ... ... ,, F. M. Heichelheim 

VTckwTX., Q., UEconomie royale des Lagides ... ... ... ,, H. 1 . Bell 

Sethe, K., Vom Bilde zum Buchstaben. Die Entstehung der 
Schrift {Untersuchungefi ziir Geschichte und Altertumskunde 

Agyptens, Bd. XII) ... ... ... ... ... ... ,, R. O. Faulkner 

Spiegel, L., Die Idee vom Totengericht in der dgyptischen 
Religion ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ,, A. W. Shorterf 

Turner, E. G., Catalogue of Greek and Latin Papyri and 

Ostraca in the Possession of the University of Aberdeen ... ,, H. G. M. Bass... 

List of Plates 

List of Illustrations in the Text 



Index of Words, Etc., Discussed 
















By the EDITOR 

Since this volume of the Journal appears in a new style of print and with a new 
cover, it has seemed fitting to celebrate the occasion with a coloured plate. Our 
readers will, it is hoped, agree that for this no more attractive subject could have been 
chosen than Mrs. Brunton’s beautiful painting of the gold dagger from the tomb 
of Tut'ankhamun. So eloquently does Plate I speak for itself that little is required 
in the way of description, the more so since the dagger is dealt with in some detail 
in the discoverer’s own account.' The full records of the tomb are now deposited in 
the Griffith Institute at Oxford, and exhibit the neat precision characteristic of all 
Howard Carter’s work, besides being illustrated with beautiful pencil drawings such 
as few artists, and certainly no living archaeologist, could have surpassed. From this 
source has been taken the slight additional information here added by way of supple- 
ment to Carter’s published statements. 

The gold dagger, of which the fellow is one with iron blade and crystal knob, 
measures 31-9 cm. in height, i.e. roughly a third as much again as the present repro- 
duction. The materials used in the cloisonne bands alternating with the granulated 
gold work of the haft are given in Carter’s notes as lapis lazuli, carnelian, malachite, 
green felspar, and jasper red glass. The cartouches on the top of the knob are of 
applied embossed gold, and most of the semi-precious stones already mentioned are 
employed also there. The blade is of specially hardened gold with a reddish tinge, for 
which Carter suggests an admixture of copper. It must be realized that of the sheath 
all that is shown in the Plate is the back, as is indeed clear from the two gold loops 
through which perhaps passed a girdle that has been preserved. The front is much 
less attractive, exhibiting a feather pattern of cloisonne work beneath a frieze of pal- 
metto ornament, and terminating at the point with a jackal’s head in embossed gold.^ 
The animals on the back recall the hunting scenes found in many a tomb, but are 
even more charmingly displayed in the limited space available between the row of 
spirals above and the elaborate floral device below. The present writer sees no reason 
to suspect Aegean influence. A tiny detail invisible in our painting is the rosette on 
the shoulder of the lion, which, together with a cheetah, is engaged in biting the lower 
of the tw^o ibexes. The liveliest depiction of all is the little calf at the bottom; it is 
portrayed in full flight, having thus far escaped the attention of the hounds and their 

Howard Carter, The Tomb of Tutankhamen, ii, 131-3, with pis. 87, 88. 

“ Op. cit.y pi. 88, A. 

( 2 ) 




The little book entitled The Instruction of Ammenemes I is, alike because of the intimate 
and individual character of its contents and the importance of the monarch to whom it 
is attributed, one of the most remarkable literary works that have come down to us 
from Pharaonic Egypt ; and the poor or fragmentary manuscripts by which it is alone 
represented at present are worthy of the closest study, pending the discovery of a good 
and complete Middle Kingdom copy. A very important contribution to the proper 
understanding of it was made in 1934 by Prof. De Buck in Md. Maspero l, 847 ff. ; 
setting out from the statement in P. Chester Beatty IV, vs. 6, 13-14 that its author was 
a scribe Akhtoy, he made out a good case for the view that the Instruction was not, as 
has been widely held, written by the king himself towards the end of his lifetime for 
his son and successor Sesostris I as ‘a book which would serve both as a memorial to 
his mighty deeds and an apologia for his retirement from the kingly office V but that 
in this work ‘the dead king is talking or is supposed to talk out of his tomb’ (p. 849). 
De Buck supported this hypothesis by a number of considerations (including the proba- 
bility that Ammenemes therein relates his own murder) which it is unnecessary to 
summarize here. 

Curiously enough De Buck seems to have overlooked the fact that in the second half 
of the last century a number of scholars took the same view, namely that in the Instruc- 
tion Ammenemes is speaking after his death. This followed from their interpretation 
of the words m zvpt mirt in the introductory passage : ‘Here begins the Instruction which 
the Majesty of King . . . Ammenemes, justified, made, when he spoke m wpt m)ct to 
his son, the All-Lord, saying: “Thou who art arisen as a god, hearken to what I shall 
tell thee . . They interpreted this phrase in the Instruction by reference to another 
example of it in the Stela of Taimhdtep, wife of Psherenptah, High Priest of Memphis, 
with which I am dealing in an article in the next volume of the Journal. Taimhotep 
records there (11. 8 ff.) that she and her husband having had three daughters and no son, 
they prayed to Imouthes (Imhotep) for a male child. ‘And he hearkened to our suppli- 
cations, he heard his (Psherenptah’s) prayers. The Alajesty of this god came to the 
bedside- of this High Priest of Memphis m icp{t) m/ct ,3 and he said, “Cause a great 
building to be made in the adytum of 'Ankhtawi, the place in which my body is con- 

^ Gardiner, Hierat, Pap. 5.1/, iii, p. 44, quoted by De Buck, p. 848. 

" ^ (so clearly in the Williams impression at the Griffith Institute). I take this to be a sportive writing 
(similar to £ hrt hrzu; cf. also the variation of with in the old title) of hr tp; for the curiously special- 
ized meaning of this phrase see my note on p. 145, below. 

3 Written ; for the monogram cf. P. Ani (Bk. Dead)^ ph 3, over the balance, right. 



cealed, and I will reward thee for it with a male child.” And upon this he awoke 
{nhs pw ir-n-f hr nn) and adored this august god.’^ Birch, in his article On Tzoo Egn. 
Tablets of the Ptolemaic Period, published in Archaeologia xxxix (1864), translates 
wplf) msct here as ‘a dream’, and adds in a footnote (p. 32 of the offprint) ‘This 
expression for a dream has been recognized both by myself and hlr. Goodwin,- who 
also finds it repeated in the second Sallier Papyrus, which, at the opening, gives an 
account of the dreams of Amenemha I.’ (The attribution of the dream to Ammenemes 
is of course wrong.) Chabas, in Reponse a la critique (1868), reprinted in Bibl. egyptoL, 
XI, 203 ff., corrects (p. 259) Brugsch’s reading of the group in Taimhotep’s stela as 
‘dp-stf and identification with ohu}, why, ‘sleep’ in his Worterbuch, l, 59 (1867), by 
reference to the same phrase in the Instruction'. ‘hl.S. Birch a depuis longtemps signale 
le sens reve, songe, du groupe ... hi. Brugsch . . . pent voir la forme complete 
du mot dans les Instructions politiques qu’Amenemha P" revele a son fils. . . . Decom- 
pose, le mot parait signifier: avis de verite, revelation. M. Birch avait raison aussi bien 
pour la lecture du mot que pour le sens.’ Maspero, translating the text in Records of the 
Past, ist Series, ii (1874), reprinted in his Etudes de Myth. et. d' Arch., in (= Bibl. 
egyptoL, VII, 165 ff.), gives (p. ii, or p. 166 of the reprint) ‘he says in a dream — unto 
his son the Lord intact . . .’, without comment. Birch, Ancient History from the 
Monuments : Egypt . . . (n.d., but 1875), 61 : ‘A papyrus in the British Museum records 
the instructions given in a dream by Amenemha I to his son.’ Pierret, Diet, dl arch. eg. 
(1875), 519, art. ‘Songes’, states: ‘Les songes jouent un grand role dans la litterature 
egyptienne. Amenemha P'' apparait en songe a son fils Ousertesen P"" et lui donne 
des conseils sur I’art de regner (Pap. Sallier, IP).’ Schack-Schackenburg, in Die 
Unterweisimg des Konigs Amenemhat I. (1882), 2, translates ‘indem er das Rechte offen- 
bart’. In a note he says that if upt msn means ‘a dream’ the Horus-name of AntePo of 
Dyn. XVII is ‘sehr auffallig’, and considers the punctuation to preclude the meaning 
‘dream’, hlaspero, in Hist. anc. des peuples de V orient classique: Les origines (1895), 
466 : ‘La reputation de sagesse qu’il acquit . . . devint telle qu’un ecrivain, a peu pres 
son contemporain, composa sous son nom un pamphlet ou il etait cense adresser a son 
fils ses instructions posthumes sur I’art de gouverner.^ H lui apparaissait en reve et, 
I’apostrophant. . . .’ 

After this, however, the translation of zept m;^t in the Instruction as ‘dream’ or 
‘revelation’ seems to have been given up. Griffith, in ZAS xxxiv (1896), 35 ff., con- 
siders that Ammenemes wrote his Instruction ten years before his death, on associat- 
ing his son with him on the throne, and translates ‘in dividing (or declaring) truth’, 
without comment. Shortly afterwards, in A Library of the World's Best Literature 
(1897), 5324, he gave ‘which he spake as a dividing of truth to his son . . .’, with a 

1 This has been rightly recognized as an example of the 'incubation’ which was much practised at the 
temple of Imouthes-Asclepios at Sakkarah: r/. Hurr^p Imhotep (2nd edn.), Index, s.v. ‘Incubation’; Foucart, 
pp. 35 ff. of the article cited p. 4 below. 

2 I have been unable to find any published statement by Goodwin to this effect ; in his article On Hieratic 
Papyri in Cambridge Essays (n.d., but 1858), 269, he had translated, without comment, ‘speaking counsels of 
truth [or precious counsels] to his son’. 

3 The passage, to this point only, is repeated from the small 1886 edition, 96. 



reference to 2 Tim. ii. 15 (‘rightly dividing the word of truth’). Erman, in Aus d. 
Papyrus d. kgl. Museen (1899), 44; ‘Er sagt als Weisheitsbotschaft’, without comment. 
Breasted, Anc. Rec., i (1906), § 478: ‘while distinguishing truth’, without comment. 
Gunn, The Instruction of Ptah-hotep (1906): ‘In discovering words of truth,’ without 
comment. Erman, Literatur d. Aegypter (1923): ‘in einer Botschaft der Wahrheit’, 
without comment. Foucart, in Hastings Encycl. Rel. Ethics, v (1912), 36, s.v. ‘Dreams 
and Sleep (Egyptian)’, says: ‘Cases of direct intervention by the dead are not of great 
frequency in the literature at present known to us. The view of Pierret {Diet, d’arch. 
egypt., Paris, 1875, s.v. “Songe”), that the famous papyrus of “The Teaching of 
Amenemhat’’ has reference to an appearance of the king’s father, who came in a 
dream to instruct his son, is nothing more than hypothesis.’ Maspero, in his edition 
of the text in the Bibl. d’ etude, vi (1914), refers, p. xiii, to m wpt mset, ‘que j’ai traduite 
par “songe”, apres Brugsch, admettant, comme Chabas I’avait fait, qu’elle designait 
un de ces songes prophetiques, par lesquels les dieux, — et les Pharaons morts etaient 
desdieux, — revelaientleurpensee aux hommes: e’etait done apres sa mort qu’Amenem- 
hait “se levant en dieu”,' aurait donne des conseils a son fils. Griffith, sans 

repousser resolument cette maniere de voir, prefere penser qu’Amenemhait F'' etait 
vivant encore au moment ou il parla, et les derniers versets prouvent qu’il a raison. 
On the same page he translates m wpt mset by ‘en message sincere’. ^ Finally, De Buck, 
op. cit., 852, refers to ‘the emphasis which the opening words lay on the truth of what 
follows {ddfm wpt nurty. 

For my part, I am strongly inclined to agree with the view of the older writers that 
Ammenemes appeared posthumously to his son in a dream or revelation, and to see 
in this a valuable confirmation of De Buck’s interpretation of the text. It would be 
pleasant to be able to adduce further examples of this meaning of wpt msrt, but I am 
unable to do so.'^ Nor am I able to extract more evidence from the text than De 

^ Other translators have taken m ntr as the first words of Ammenemes' address {i.e. as object of, and not 
as circumstantial to, the second dd'f). If Maspero 's view were correct we should have here additional evidence 
of the posthumous character of the Instruction j but I fear that the other is to be preferred, not so much on 
grammatical as on stylistic grounds : (a) for the address to begin with an imperative, without any apostrophe 
before it, would be very harsh ; {b) the balance of phrases seems to require these words as part of the discourse : 

m ntr | sdm n ddtvi n'k || nszvyk V \ hknk idbw; (c) for both occurrences of dd’f to be followed by adverbial 
phrases would be very clumsy. Hi is not used in other accounts of dreams in which a divine being appears 
(Sphinx Stela, Kamak Inscr. of Merenptah, 1 . 29, Bekhten Stela, Dream Stela of Tanutamun, Stela of Taim- 
hotep). And 'se levant en dieu' implies that Ammenemes has become a god only since his death, which 
would be quite contrary to Egyptian beliefs. Hi will refer to the accession of Sesostris, and since he has 
already acceded (note that he is referred to as Nb-r-dr) we should take the word as a perfect participle in the 
vocative ( O thou who hast appeared as a god’)^ and not, with Griffith, as an imperative ('shine forth as a god'). 

“ Maspero 's final view {BibL d' etude ^ vi, xlv) was that Ammenemes escaped with his life from the murderous 
attack, but was then forced to give up the throne to Sesostris I, whom he regarded as the accomplice if not the 
instigator of the assassins. I am unable to find any evidence of this in the text. His translation of ih iryd 
shrw’k (P . IMillingen, 2, 6), as ‘que (desormais) j'agisse selon tes dessins' is not impossible, according to Wb., iv, 
260 (7), but ‘therefore let me direct thee' is the primd facie meaning. I do not understand his reference to the 
final verses. 

3 Making nifit adjectival, ‘true'; but in all texts the word is written with p and IM, w’hich are correct for 
‘truth’, but would be quite wrong in ‘true’. 

Wp mrt is well known as an epithet of Thoth (but not of Imouthes), the king and the vizier (see Wb, s.v 
with the references) but in that use doubtless means ‘revealing truth' in a quite general sense. 



Buck has done to support his view, except on one point. De Buck says (p. 850, n. 3) 
that the epithet msc-hrw which follows Ammenemes’ name in all the manuscripts may 
be an addition of the later scribes, and that it is therefore perhaps unwise to attach any 
importance to it. But if it is there a later addition we ought to find it also after the name 
of Sesostris I, near the end of the text. This, however, is not the case: in the two 
manuscripts known to me (both late) in which this passage is preserved, one’ has^ p 
after the name, the other- has^.^. To my mind this is pretty good evidence that 
tmr-hrw after Ammenemes’ name is to be taken seriously, as having probably stood in 
the original text. 


The more recent historians^ have been in agreement in taking Manetho’s entry 
‘Ammanemes, 38 years, who was murdered by his own chamberlains (or, eunuchs)’ to 
refer to Ammenemes II; naturally enough, since this is the second king of the name 
mentioned in the Aegyptiaca, But it is strange to find De Buck, after giving evidence 
amounting almost to demonstration that Ammenemes I was murdered by his chamber- 
lains, still taking that view and saying (p. 849, n. i) ‘What would naturally happen in 
those circumstances-’ is shown by the famous case of Ramses III and Manetho’s note 
about the death of Amenemmes II: o? imo rcov iStW evvovxcov dvjjpeOr].’ Surely it now 
becomes imperative to refer Manetho’s note to Ammenemes I ! A great deal has 
been said about Manetho having drawn on popular traditions in the compilation of the 
Aegyptiaca ; here is an admirable example, for the evidence that has been adduced, and 
the date of the latest manuscripts of the Instruction, show {a) that Ammenemes I was 
murdered by his own chamberlains, and {b) that the tradition of this survived during 
more than half the period which elapsed between his time and Manetho’s. And it 
would a priori be exceedingly probable that the dastardly murder of the great and 
glorious founder of the Twelfth Dynasty was remembered long after his Instruction 
ceased to be read. It is to be noted, further, that the Ammenemes who was murdered 
by his chamberlains is actually the king of the name in Manetho’s Twelfth Dynasty ; 

the king who is always regarded as Ammenemes I is placed between Dyns. XI and XII. 

Some of the older historians were on the right track, but based their view on the 
story of Sinuhe, not on the Instruction.^ Lauth, Manetho u. d. Turiner Konigspapyrus 
(1865), 221-2, says ‘Hr. Chabas hat in einem der Berliner Papyrus die wichtige 
Entdeckung gemacht, dass ’Ap€vep,r]s I durch ein Palastereigniss verungliickt ist. 
Manetho hat uns diese Notiz iiberliefert mit den Worten: vtto t(I>p tStW eiivovxcov dvrjpddr}. 
Aber sie ist von den Ausziiglern dem zweiten ’Apevep-qs beigefiigt worden, weil 

■ P. Saltier II, 12, 3. - Posener, Cat. des Ostraca hierat. litt. de Deir el Medineh, No. 1 103, 1 . 4. 

3 E.g., Wiedemann, Ag. Gesch. (1884), 248 ; Petrie, Hist., i, 174 (of loth edn.) ; Meyer, Gesch. Alt., i (2), and 
and 3rd edns. (1907, 1913), § 280; Maspero, Bibl. d'Etude, vi (1914), xxix, xlvii; CAH, i (1923), 306. 

Namely that ‘A living Amenemmes would always be a dangerous rallying point for the many devoted 
partizans he was bound to have and the conspirators having successfully dealt the first blow would certainly be 
wise enough to do their work thoroughly by murdering the king at once.’ 

5 Several of the earlier writers regarded the attack described in the Instruction as an incident in the king’s 
struggle for the throne and crown at the beginning of his reign ; see Brugsch, Gesch. d. alt. Aegyptens unter d. 
Pharaonen (1877), 117; Rawlinson, Hist, of Anc. Egypt (1881), ll, 146; Maspero, Hist, ancienne (1886), 94; cf. 
also Meyer, Gesch. Alt., ist edn. (1884), i, § 97. 



Amenemes I ihnen ausserhalb der XII. Dyn. steht.’ And Unger, Chronologic d. 
Manetho (1867), 120, referring to INIanetho’s note: ‘Auffallend ist, dass, wie Chabas in 
einem Berliner Papyrus gefunden hat, den Amenemhet I dies Schicksal betroffen hat, 
in einer Palastrevolution umzukommen. Man hat daher die Stellung der manetho- 
nischen Notiz fiir einen Textfehler erklart;^ die Verwechslung kann auch von IManetho 
selbst herriihren.’ The references to Chabas (Unger may derive from Lauth in this 
matter) are apparently based on his book Les Papyrus hieratiques de Berlin (1863; 
reprinted in Bibl. egyptoL, x, 289 IT.), in which he remarks, commenting on Sinuh.e, 
B 36-7, that Ammenemes I seems to have died in mysterious circumstances (pp. 323, n. i, 
325 of reprint).- Von Bissing, Gesch. Agyptens im Umriss 155, n. 58, and Vlaspero, 

La XIP dynashe de Manethon \r\.Rec. trav. xxviii (1906), ii, reject this emendation of 
hlanetho’s text. Von Bissing saying merely that there is no occasion to make it, hlaspcro 
that the Sinuhe passage had been misunderstood, the story showing us that Ammenemes 
I died a natural death while his son was waging war in Libya. Yet we find ]\Iaspero 
taking a different view two years later: ‘Le vieux souverain avait-il ete victime de 
quelque conspiration de palais, et doit-on croire qu’il avait ete assassine par ses eunuques, 
comme son second successeur Amenemhait II le fut, d’apres la tradition recueillie par 
hlanethon ? On pent le supposer . . .’ {Memoires de Sinouhit (1908), xxxiii-iv). jMaspero 
here comes very near to what must now be regarded as the correct view, without, 
however, explicitly identifying the attack described in the Instruction with the murder 
of the king. He, and some of the other authorities whom I have quoted, seem to have 
failed by a hair’s breadth only to arrive at this conclusion. 


It will perhaps have been noticed with surprise that throughout this article the 
Greek form of Imn-m-Jvt has been spelt ‘Ammenemes’, and not in the current form 
‘Amenemmes’. The reason is that there appears to be no classical authority at all for 
this spelling. The forms found in the manuscripts of Manetho are: in Dyn. XII and 
just before, in the version of Africanus, M/x/neW/xTj? twice, ’ Ainxavijirjs twice; in the 
version of Eusebius ’T,u,/Lteve;u7]s- twice, with variant ’Afievefnjs in one manuscript, and 
’Afifiaveix-qs once; in Dyn. XIX, ' Ap-iieveiiv^s once (Africanus), once (Eusebius). ^ 

The Book of Sothis has ’A[j.ev€nrjs once (No. 9)> ^ Afifxeveiirjs once (No. 55). Of these 
four forms, none of which has the second /x doubled, predominates, and 

should in my opinion be used. It seems to be as good a transcription of Imrt-m-hs{t) 
as one could desire ; for the doubled first ^ cf. ’AfifMcov and many personal names begin- 
ningwiththegod’snameinPreisigke,Mawze«6i/c^. The form ‘Amenemmes’ was perhaps 
due to Sethe, who used it in 1904 [ZAS xli , 38);*^ since then it had been employed in 
many much-read German w'orks, such as Baedeker’s Aegypten (and Egypt), and by 
those English Egyptologists who write kings’ names in their Greek forms, with the 
exception of Griffith, who always wrote ‘Ammenemes’. 

‘ He is probably referring to Lauth. 

^ Chabas may have expressed himself more definitely on this point in his article on Sinuhe in Pantheon litteraire 
I, which I have not been able to see. 3 See Waddell, Manetho (Loeb Library), 62 ff., 148, 150, 234, 244. 

* And was still using it in 1929 (Amun u. d. acht Urgotter, § 9). 

( 7 ) 




Four albums containing rubbings of Egyptian monuments made between 1830 and 
1840 by a certain John Williams have recently been presented to the Griffith Institute 
at Oxford by his grandson. John Williams vvas Assistant Secretary of the Royal 
Astronomical Society, and author of a book entitled An Essay on the Hieroglyphics of 
the Ancient Egyptians published in 1836, in which he gives an example on pL III of 
‘the application of Lithography to a mechanical method of producing perfectly accurate 
copies of inscriptions on engraved stones’, a private invention for which he received 
the silver medal of the Society of Arts. Encouraged by this, Williams evolved a plan 
for making copies of all suitable Egyptian objects in museums and private collections 
including those on the continent, which would indeed have been a most valuable 
record had it been carried out. An outline of this scheme is attached to the volumes of 
rubbings, evidently intended to be submitted to some learned society which might 
finance the undertaking. 

‘From the increasing interest manifested at the present time in the study of ancient Inscriptions 
and more particularly to those relating to the Hieroglyphics of the ancient Egyptians, it is highly 
desirable if not absolutely necessary that perfectly accurate copies of as many monuments as possible 
should be collected and deposited in some one place where free access might be had to them by all 
persons engaged in this interesting branch of study. The advantage of studying from authentic 
copies is too obvious to need any remark. Its convenience must be evident to all who have at any 
time had occasion to compare original monuments with each other situated either in different and 
distant parts of the same museum or in separate collections, possibly many miles apart and it may 
be in different countries. It is therefore much to be wished that copies of the various monuments 
in the continental museums in Egypt, Greece and Rome should be collected and in this manner 
deposited in one place. For this purpose Mr. Williams who has for many years past adopted with 
great success a mechanical method of copying inscriptions on engraved stones (for which he received 
the silver medal of the Society of Arts) which is exceedingly rapid in its execution, and easy in its 
application, and which ensures perfect accuracy, would be happy to offer his serv ices. His proposal 
is, first to make copies of all the articles in the British Museum and other collections in this country 
to which his process will apply. To visit the Continent and in like manner obtain copies of the 
various objects in the different Museums, and if it should be thought advisable, to proceed to Egypt 
and secure in this way copies of a number of the valuable inscriptions which are it may be said 
hourly disappearing in that countr\^, or which in consequence of the massive nature of the monuments 
on which they are sculptured cannot be removed. These copies to be placed in the British Museum 
as the national depository where access to them would be the most easy to all engaged in their 
investigation. [This was never carried out. J.W.] For this purpose it would be desirable that a 
permanent office of moderate emolument with a reasonable allowance for travelling expenses should 
be granted to him. Mr. Williams would refer to his extensive series of copies taken in this manner 



from Egyptian and other Monuments as a proof of the efficacy of this system and also as shewing a 
method of mounting and binding them up into volumes. He has also succeeded in applying this 
process to Lithography so that copies may be indefinitely multiplied at a very cheap rate should it 
be thought desirable to do so. Should this project be carried into effect it is manifest that the col- 
lection of copies thus made would be one absolutely unrivalled in extent and importance for as it 
would present perfect facsimiles it would (as far as the inscriptions are concerned) be of as much 
value to the student as the original monuments and would be one worthy of that nation in which the 
first probable clue to the meaning of the highly interesting inscriptions of the ancient Egyptians was 
discovered. Mr. Williams would at any time be happy to attend and shew his method of copying 
ancient monuments, and also explain fully the manner of his proceeding.’ 

Apparently the hoped-for subsidy was not forthcoming, and the rubbings were 
confined to antiquities in English collections, presumably at the inventor’s own ex- 
pense, and consist chiefly of stelae, statues, and sarcophagi in the British Museum and 
Dr. Lee’s Collection at Hartwell House, with a few others from the Ashmolean Museum, 
the Soane Museum, etc., of which a list will be found at the end of this article. 

The exact method used by Williams is described in the following extract from the 
Transactions of the Royal Society of Arts. 

‘The Silver Isis Medal was presented to Mr. J. Williams, of the School-house, Spitalfields, for his 
method of obtaining Impressions from engraved Stones, or Plates of Metal. Mr. Williams’s method 
is not at all intended to vie with or supersede common copper-plate printing, being applicable only to 
large and coarse works, such as copying monumental brasses, or inscriptions or hieroglyphics on marble 
and other stones. The specimens produced by Mr. Williams for the inspection of the Society were — 
a copy of the hieroglyphic, Coptic, and Greek inscriptions on the celebrated Rosetta stone, now in the 
British IMuseum, made in two hours and a half ; and a copy of the hieroglyphics on part of the splendid 
sarcophagus, known commonly by the name of Alexander’s tomb, also in the British Museum : the 
whole of the sculptures on this latter relic of antiquity might be copied, according to the candidate’s 
computation, in about fourteen hours. Nothing can be simpler and more readily portable than Mr. 
Williams’s apparatus, or more easy and expeditious in its use. To travellers, therefore, especially 
in the countries of classical antiquity, it would probably be found of great value, by enabling them 
to obtain, in a short time, not merely copies, but facsimiles, of curious and valuable inscriptions. 
The method employed by Mr. Williams is as follows : He makes damp a proper quantity of demy 
printing paper, and lays a sheet evenly on the surface of the stone : this he covers with another sheet 
of paper blackened on one side, the blackened side being downwards; he then, with a piece of 
smooth soft wood, rubs forcibly on the upper surface of the blackened paper (examining it from 
time to time) till the characters become quite distinct on the damp paper, the ground or flat surface 
of the stone being represented by a black tint, and the figures being left in white. Where the surface 
to be copied is larger than a single sheet, others are to be added successively, and the blackened paper 
is to be transferred from one to the other. A single piece of blackened paper may be used four or 
five times, after which it must be replaced by another, or must have a new coating of pigment laid 
on. The pigment is composed of black lead in very fine powder, mixed well, by beating in a mortar, 
with hard soap ; the mass is then to be diluted with distilled or soft water to the consistence of thin 
paste, and is to be laid on the paper by means of a soft brush : when dry, it is ready for use.’^ 

The rubbings seem to have been fixed with a solution, perhaps milk. In some cases 
they have been brushed over with a grey wash to bring out the detail more distinctly : 
the stela, pi. HI, fig. i, is an example of this method, and that on pi. H of the untouched 

^ Transactions of the Society of Arts, XLix, pt. ii (1833), 18-19. 



rubbing. For stones inscribed in low relief, and for incised texts on wood, the process 
is most successful, very high relief being of course impossible. There is one cuneiform 
text, the inscription of Nebuchadnezzar at East India House, which is particularly 
clear, and in one instance there is a reproduction of a lithograph which has been made 
from a rubbing. Williams’s invention certainly gives remarkably good results, and as 
a mechanical process has not been superseded to-day; it compares very favourably 
with squeezes, or even with photographs, and is much more reliable than many pub- 
lished copies. 

Samuel Sharpe seems to have made use of this material for many of the plates in 
his Egyptian Inscriptions (1837-55), preface he says that they were traced from 

Williams’s mechanical process. It is quite obvious, however, that they are free-hand 
copies and not tracings, as Sharpe’s plates show a number of misreadings which do 
not occur in the rubbings. There is also an indirect reference to them in an article 
by Wiedemann in 1889,' where he describes a series of sheets of lithographs of monu- 
ments in the Hartwell House Museum made by Madeley, Lithographer, 3 Wellington 
Street, Strand, about 1835, which had been acquired by the University Library at 
Bonn. These lithographs were very indistinct, and had been corrected by Dr. Leemans 
of Leyden, and supplemented by copies and rubbings. There seems no doubt that the 
latter were those made by Williams, as all the objects mentioned in Wiedemann’s 
paper appear among them, and the description {op. cit., 421, No. 8) of a text ‘given by 
Captain Brace to the United Service Museum’ is evidently taken from Williams’s own 
note in ink in our copy. We even have a specimen of the unsatisfactory lithographs at 
Bonn pasted in by Williams beside his rubbing of the statue of Sebkhotpe {op. cit., 418- 
19, No. 2), where the badly shaped and inaccurate hieroglyphs form a striking contrast. 

The majority of the objects dealt with are in the British Museum, and include a 
number of stelae only published somewhat unsatisfactorily in line, or merely mentioned 
in the Guides. Among these are the ‘crossword’ hymn to Mut of the time of Ramesses 
VI (Brit. Mus. 194), hitherto unpublished, the so-called Denkmal memphitischer 
Theologie of Sabacon (Brit. Mus. 948), which has not been reproduced by photography, 
the stela of a metal-engraver Tunennehebkhbns (pi. H), marked as belonging to Mr. 
Cureton but now in the British Museum,^ and the small stela of Amennakhte before 
Meresger, acquired from the Belmore Collection in 1843 (pi. HI, fig. i), only published 
in line.3 

The objects at Hartwell House belonging to Dr. Lee are interesting, as most of them 
have never been reproduced. The whole collection was bought by Lord Amherst, 
and the antiquities were sold with his own at Sotheby’s in 1921, and are now presum- 
ably scattered among museums and private collections where most of them still await 
rediscovery. (Incidentally I shall be very glad of any information concerning the present 
whereabouts of inscribed objects from the Amherst Collection, other than those in 
the Ny Carlsberg Glyptothek at Copenhagen which have appeared in the Museum 

^ Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch, xi, 417 ff. 

2 Brit. Mus. 700, Guide to the Egyptian Galleries {Sculpture) ^ 1909, p. 205, Exhb. No. 745, 

3 Brit. Mus. 374, Hieroglyphic Texts from Egyptian Stelae, vn, pi. 29, left; Bruyere, Mertseger, p. ii, fig. 6. 



publications.) Among the Hartwell House rubbings are some curious little reliefs 
(pi. HI, fig. 2) from a statuette : on each side are two kneeling captives with cartouches of a 

King apparently (® ^ or ( s and on the back is a bull of somewhat Cretan 

type beneath the inverted end of papyrus-plants. From a marked catalogue belonging to 
Dr. Lee, now in the Griffith Institute Library, we know that this small piece was 
bought by him at Sotheby’s Sale in May 1833 for ^i. 12^., outbidding a Mr. Till who 
offered 30^. The Sale Catalogue (No. 330) describes it as follows: ‘A Seat, or rather 
Throne, in silacious (sic) Stone, the occupants broken off, probably Isis suckling 
Horus, height 3 j inches. Most interesting, representing in bas-relief two slaves on 
each side, with their respective “Cartouches”.’ Of its subsequent history nothing is 
known, as it does not appear in the Hartwell House Catalogue. From the Soane 
Museum we have the sarcophagus of Sethos I, and two stelae from Abydos,’ and 
from the Ashmolean Museum the well-known tablet of Shery,- a fragment of the 
sarcophagus of Parkep now joined to the other fragment in the British Museum, ^ and 
a board from a late coffin of Kha^hap. An interesting stela marked ‘Cureton’, of 
Yuny Chief King’s scribe, and his wife Ernutet 5^, with physicians, and 

a scribe bearing trays of medicines and surgical instruments ( ?), is now likewise in the 
Ashmolean Museum. 

There remain a few unidentified objects, wLich must now be in some museum or 
private collection, and I should be glad of any information about them. An Eleventh 
Dynasty stela of Ameny and a Middle Kingdom stela of Neferhdtep and his family 
are said to have belonged to Mr. Dodd. Mr. Sidney Smith informs me that the British 
Museum used to purchase antiquities from Dodd, and it is possible that these stelae 
were also among those acquired; but they do not appear in the publications, and the 
Museum records are not available at present. Besides the stela of Yuny, just described, 
and that of Tunennehebkhons, now Brit. Mus. 700 (see pi. H), there is another ‘Cureton’ 
stela still unidentified, which has Anubis attending a mummy on a lion-couch with two 
mourning goddesses, and a Greek inscription at the bottom. A small stela with a child 
offering flowers to Sipar as young prince, dedicated by Nanay may also be in 

the British Museum. From the United Services Museum come three inscriptions, of 
which the IVIuseum knows nothing : a stela of the scribe Peshed, showing the deceased 
in the bark of Re<-Harakhti at the top and kneeling below with a hymn to Req a late 
stela with Harresnet, master of the mysteries of the God’s Mother, third and fourth 
prophet of Onuris, lord of terror, before six divinities, and a block with the titles of 
an Old Kingdom official called Kaemmedu The text of Kaemmedu^ comes 

from a false door which was sold at Sotheby’s in 1921 with the Amherst Collection 
(Sale Catalogue No. 212), so the two stelae were probably disposed of at the same time. 
There is also one stela marked Lee Collection which does not appear in the Hartwell 

‘ Texts published by Capart m Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch, xxix, 311-14, and one stela by Roy in Trans. Soc. Bibl. 
Arch. VI, 418-19, with plate. 2 Lepsius, Auszvahl, pi. 9, top. 

3 Brit. Mus. 1387; Sharpe, Eg. Inscr., 2nd Ser., pi. 76; Guide to the Egyptian Galleries (Scidpture), 1909, 
p. 240, Exhb. No. 882-3, where the name is wrongly read as Pep-ari- .... -sep?, see also rather similarly 
Ranke, Agypt. Personennamen, 131,9. “ Published in Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch, xi, No. 8. 



House or Amherst Collection Sale Catalogues. It is a New Kingdom stela of a car- 
penter Menna ^ in three registers : at the top Anubis is seated facing Osiris and 
the Western Goddess, below two men with a child offer to Menna with his wife and 
daughter ( ?), and at the bottom is the mummy in a sarcophagus mourned by the widow 
and a small girl. 

The following is a list of Williams’s rubbings from museums. British Museum: 
Registration Nos. 1-3, 5, 10, 17, 20-1, 23-4, 26-7, 29, 31-4, 37, 43, 48, 57, 66-7, 83, 
86, 92, loo-i, 103, 108, 111-12, 123, 128-32, 134, 138-9, 141-3, 146-8, 150-2, 158, 
161-7, 187, 190, 193-8, 200-2, 204, 206, 208-11, 214, 217, 219-20, 223-4, 226-8, 
230-2, 234, 239-40, 242-7, 251, 253-6, 258, 288-95, 297, 300, 304-5, 309, 312, 314, 
316-17, 320-1, 325, 327-8, 330, 332, 338, 344-9, 354, 358-9, 361-3, 365, 368-70, 
372-4, 378, 380, 386, 389, 391, 395-6, 414, 447, 471, 478-9, 498, 507, 517, 528, 530, 
557-8, 560, 562-9, 571-9, 582-5, 587, 644, 700, 772, 886, 998, 1 13 1, 1377, 1382, 1387, 
5621, 8497, 8501, statue of Neferebre<^makhet, canopic-jars, etc. Hartwell House: 
Nos. 21,83,416-17,419,446, 551-4, 556, 573-4, 591-3, statuette ( Ill, fig. 2, stela of 
Menna, pyramidion, ushabti of Tamyt. Soane Museum: stelae 447, 448, sarcophagus 
of Sethos I. East India House: cuneiform inscription of Nebuchadnezzar. Ashmolean 
Museum: stelae of Shery and Yuny, board from coffin of Kha'hap. Berlin Museum: 
offering-table No. 1159. Brussels Aluseum; two cones E. 3983, 3992. 




The custom of carrying military insignia is almost as old as the art of war itself. When 
warfare emerged from the indiscriminate tribal scrimmage into the status of an organ- 
ized pursuit, and armies became large enough to be subdivided into regiments, it 
became customary for each component body of the host to have its own standard or 
ensign, raised high on a pole so that it could readily be seen in the confusion of battle. 
These standards, borne at the head of the regiments, served two purposes. They enabled 
the commander-in-chief, even in the thickest of the fight, to see at a glance where his 
regiments stood and how they fared, and, what was perhaps even more important, they 
■served as a focus for the esprit de corps of the unit itself. To lose your standard, be it 
the eagle of a Roman legion or the colours of an English regiment, was dire disgrace, and 
many a commander has owed his victory to a desperate struggle to save a standard from 
capture at a crucial moment of the battle. Only within the last hundred years, when 
the increasing range and accuracy of modern weapons have rendered imperative the 
concealment and disguise of combatants, have military standards disappeared from 
the field of battle and become relegated to ceremonial parades, though even to-day the 
regimental colours of an army are the objects of strong sentimental attachment as the 
embodiments of tradition and the memorials of valorous deeds in past wars. 

We find this custom of bearing standards or ensigns into battle already in force in 
Ancient Egypt as early as the Wars of Unification in the proto-dynastic period. On 
votive palettes of slate deposited in the national fane at Hierakonpolis we see the 
ensigns of the levies composing the army of the South symbolically breaching the walls 
of the Northern fortresses — themselves enclosing the ensigns of their garrisons' — or 
grasping a rope to which are bound prisoners taken in battle.^ On another palette 
depicting a lion-hunt — to a weakly armed people no sport, but a dangerous necessity 
akin to warfare — we actually see standards being borne by participants in the attack.^ 
Thereafter, however, the use of the standard seems to have lapsed for many centuries. 
Neither in the rare battle scenes of the Old Kingdom^ nor in those of the Middle 
Kingdom^ are military standards depicted, while the well-known models of marching 
infantry from Asyut have no ensigns at the head of their columns.^ Even in the 

^ Proc. Soc. BibL Arch,, xxii, pL 5, following p. 138. 

2 loc, cit., pi. 4. The figures of the prisoners are lost, but there can be no doubt as to the significance of the 
rope, compare the figure of the falcon leading the Delta captive on the famous Narmer palette. 

3 Capart, Primitive Art in Egypt, 23 1 . 

^ Petrie, Deshasheh, pi. 4; Quibell and Hay ter, Excavations at Saqqara: Teti Pyramid, North Side, frontis- 

5 Newberry, Beni Hasan, i, pis. 14, 16; ii, pis. 5, 15. 

^ Erman and Ranke, Aegypten, pi. 41 . 2; cf. also the carving of marching soldiers at Asyut, Wreszinski 
II, pi. 15. 



procession accompanying the transport of the colossal statue of Dhuthotpe of El- 
Bershah' the military escort appear to bear no insignia, although on similar ceremonial 
occasions in the New Kingdom the ranks of the troops were gay with standards. ^ 

The invasion of the Hyksos and their subsequent expulsion seems, however, to have 
brought about a complete revolution in Egyptian military methods. Not only did the 
Egyptians acquire a new weapon of warfare, the horse and chariot, but the whole army 
was put on a more fully organized footing. Once again the standard came into use, but 
as a regimental, and not as a tribal, distinction, and the rank of standard-bearer became 
a regular grade in the Egyptian military hierarchy. The standards which now came 
into use show great variety, ranging from the simplest to the most elaborate designs, 
and in this paper an attempt has been made to collect a number of the most typical, 
though in present conditions of research it can hardly be hoped that none have been 
overlooked. In this connexion I would like to express my deep gratitude to Mrs. N. de 
G. Davies, who not only generously put at my disposal a large number of drawings of 
standards made by herself in Egypt, but also consented to ink in the figures for pis. IV-VI. 
I am further indebted to Dr. A. H. Gardiner, who kindly lent me all his notes on 

The Egyptian word for ‘standard’ was sryt, surviving only in the title py sryt 
‘standard-bearer’. The word exists in such a variety of spellings as to suggest that it 
was of foreign origin, and it is possible that we have here a stray survivor of the Hyksos 
language. Apart from ideographic writings^ we meet such spellings as I 

[l^:'j(],6 ^7 ^^8 Pi'1q, 9 and while the determinatives may be or 

even The most extreme hieratic writings of the title py sryt are and 

^vv^vv<D unpublished Wilbour papyrus now being edited by Dr. Gardiner. 

The first appearance of military standards in the Eighteenth Dynasty is in the proces- 
sions depicted in Queen Hatshepsut’s temple at Der el-Bahri. The commonest form of 
standard is probably the semicircular fan on a long pole shown by the hieroglyph ‘f' ; 
a typical standard of this description is shown in fig. i . This ensign called sryt, which 
is confined to military and naval use, is identical in appearance, at least so far as its 
shape is concerned, with the flabellum bht borne about the person of the Sovereign, 
whose bearers were called 1 ^ The fact that two apparently identical 
objects have not only distinct names, but also are never confused the one with the 
other, hints at a fundamental distinction between them wLich is not obvious to the eye, 
and I would suggest that while the flabellum bht which fanned the king was really made 
of ostrich feathers, the standard sryt was an imitation of it in painted wood (cf. the 

J Newberty, El Bersheh, i, pi. 15. “ e.g. Naville, Deir el Bahari, pis. 88, 89, 91. 

3 e.g. Davies, Tzjco Officials^ pis. 20, 26, in the latter case with the ideogram of a ship-standard; de Rouge, 
Inscr. HierogL 264. 

+ Davies, op. cit., pi. 21. ^ JEA xx, 155. ^ Spiegelberg, Rechnungen, 13, a, 3. 

7 Louvre, C60. ^ Davies, Amarna, iii, pi. 12. 

9 Two Officials, pi. 21, top right; the restoration can hardly be doubted. 

JEA XX, 154. ” Two Officials, pi. 21. Op. cit., pi. 26. 

^3 Spiegelberg, loc. cit. ; perhaps only in hieratic. 

JEA XX, 154. It is possibly only a blunder for ^ . 

^3 Amarna, vi, pi. 20; see Gardiner, Egn. Hierat. Texts, 1, 42*, n. 2. 



determinative or sometimes, in view of the determinative <£7, in metal; such an 
ensign would stand the wear and tear of militar\' usage far better than one of real feathers, 
which would speedily become hopelessly ragged and disreputable. Usually the fan is 
painted to imitate coloured feathering, but sometimes it is of a solid red colour.' Good 
examples of this standard will be found in Naville, Deir el Bahm-i, pis. 88-91, where a 
procession of ships on the river is accompanied by a military escort on the river-bank. 
Thus in pi. 91, which shows the head of the procession, we see detachments of marines 
and of infantry, each with the "f^-standard borne at its head and its own special standard 
carried further along the ranks. From notes made by Mrs. Davies it appears that the 
marines are wearing over their loin-cloths the leather net with a square patch of leather 
on the seat — not shown in the plate — which was apparently peculiar to the nav\'.- 
The purpose of this leather garment was presumably to protect the loin-cloth from 
being speedily worn out by the friction of the rowing-bench, and lacking conclusive 
evidence to the contrary I would regard its presence in the costume of a fighting man as 
a clear indication of service on ship-board. ^ In the water procession the royal barges, 
each with a flabellum leaning against the empty throne to typify the spiritual presence 
of the Sovereign, are accompanied by other vessels of state.'' In the bows stand men 
armed with battle-axe or club, one of whom has also a spear and shield, another bearing 
the ^-standard, while on three of the ships a third man carries a curious object, pendent 
from a long staff, to which we will return later. These armed men are presumably 
officers of the royal bodyguard accompanying the rich offerings in the state barges. The 
same standard is seen borne by the troops in the other military processions at Der el- 
Bahri by the guards escorting King Akhenaton on his drives abroad, sometimes with 
coloured streamers (red, red and green) attached to the shaft (fig. 2) by the escort in 
the great procession of the Feast of Ope under King Tut<^ankhamun ;7 and in other 
military ceremonies.^ It appears in the triumph celebrated by Ramesses III after his 
victory over the peoples of the sea,^ while on the field of battle it is seen in the hands of 
charioteers in the fighting before Kadesh under Ramesses II and in Ramesses Ill’s 
victory over the Libyans." It should hot be confused with the fiabellum borne (or 
supposed to be borne) as an appurtenance of state behind the charging king.'- 

Another type of standard in common use was a rectangle mounted on a long shaft, 
which occurs in a number of different forms. In the simplest (fig. 3) the rectangle is 
entirely unadorned, and the shaft may or may not be decorated with streamers. Then 

^ Op. cit., I, pi. 9. 

2 Naville, op. cit., pi. 126, bottom left, shown by the accompanying inscription to be naval men ; Davies, Two 
OfficialSy pi. 31, w orn by the crew' of the king’s ship Beloved-of-Amun; Davies &; Gardiner, Tomb of Huy\ pi. 5. 

3 Good examples of this garment in N. M. Davies, Ancient Egyptian Paintings ^ pi. 45 ; presumably its 

Nubian w'earers ser\'ed as marines. Naville, op. cit.^ pis. 88-91 . 

5 Op. cit.y pis. 126, 155. Similar groups of three armed men w'ith standards on board state barges in pi. 153. 

^ Amarnay i, pis. 9, 15 ; iii, pi. 31 ; in ii, pi. 17, bottom, it is borne by a charioteer. 

7 Wreszinski, AtlaSy pi. 192, left. ^ Officials, pi. 27. Nelson, Medinet Habu (i), pi. 42. 

Wreszinski, Atlas, pi. 92 a, top right. Nelson, op. cit., (li), pi. 72. 

^2 e.g. Ancient Egyptian Paintings, pi. 78. 

^3 Without streamers, Two Officials, pi. 27; Amarna, ii, pi. 13; w'ith streamers, op. cit., vi, pi. 20; Theban 
Tomb 78 (unpublished). In the last instance the streamers are w'hite w'ith red outlines. 



we find the rectangle still empty, but with an ostrich feather (probably imitation) 
attached to one corner. This also may be found with or without streamers;* the 
specimen shown in fig. 4 occurs in a scene where Ramesses III is issuing equipment to 
his troops before a campaign.- Rarely the plume appears in the middle of the top edge 
(fig. 5).^ A blank space, however, is not very ornamental, and sometimes we find this 
standard embellished with symbolic devices of various kinds, often doubtless with 
reference to the names of the corps to which they belonged. An excellent example is the 
standard of ‘The Wrestlers’, borne by Nubian marines (fig. 6);-* another instance of a 
more general nature is a design from El-^Amarnah which, though damaged, apparently 
represents the king smiting a foe.= Sometimes the decoration consists of royal cartouches 
or the like ; an example from El-fi\marnah shows a rectangle bearing the cartouches of 
the Aton mounted beside an object somewhat resembling the hieroglyph ^ (fig. 7).^ 
Another standard, copied by Airs. Davies in Theban Tomb No. 74, though almost 
entirely destroyed, shows in the top left-hand corner the sign ^ and to its right a curved 
line which may be part of the frame of a cartouche. The colour of the rectangle itself, 
whether decorated or undecorated, is usually yellow,'^ but white^ and red^ also occur. 
These standards are sometimes provided with a pointed butt for sticking them upright 
in the ground,*® but in one instance a wooden stand is used.** At El-'Amarnah the 
palace guards, when off duty, stood their standards in pedestals.’- 

The two types of standard already discussed, however, are not the only ones, for 
each ship of the Egyptian navy apparently had its own boat-standard. The most usual 
kind is a cabined craft surmounted by a small fan-standard, thus betraying its descent 
from the basic ^-type. A good example is the standard of the king’s ship Beloved-of- 
Amun, of which Nebamun of Tomb 90 was standard-bearer (fig. 8 ), *3 but no two are 
exactly alike, see for instance figs. 9*^ and 10 . *5 Such standards are also summarily 
depicted in El-'Amarnah and elsewhere;*^ in the battle of Kadesh a boat-standard 
indicates the presence of a contingent of marines in the division of Ptah, though here 
they are acting as ordinary infantry. A less elaborate type of boat-standard is shown in 
fig. 1 1 ;*^ here we seem to have a religious allusion to the boat of the sun, and it is possible 
that this may not be a naval ensign at all, but may belong to a contingent of troops re- 
cruited from Heliopolis or some other centre of sun-worship.*® 

So far we have discussed standards which were not only used on the parade-ground, 
but also went to war. There are others whose elaborately ornamental nature makes it 

* Without streamers, A?narna, i, pi. 15; III, pi. 12; \T, pis. 20, 30; with streamers, op. at., i, pis. 15, 20; 
III, pi. 31. Carried on active service, Wreszinski, Atlas, ii, pi. 84, top left. 

- Nelson, op. cit. (i), pi. 29 ; cf. also pi. 42. Tomb 74 (unpublished). 

Ancient Egyptian Paintings, pi. 45, see above, p. 14, n. 3. 

5 Amarna, iv, pi. 17. ^ Op. cit., i, pi. 26. 

7 Two yellow standards in Tomb 74 and six in Tomb 78 ; of all these only one is decorated. 

® Ancient Egyptian Paintings, p\. ys- Amarna, i, pi. 15. 10 See fig. 6. 

Quibell and Hayter, op. cit., pi. 12. Amarna, vi, pis. 20, 30. 

Tzvo Officials, pi. 26, with bow restored. A more generalized version in pi. 28. 

Derel-Bahri (unpublished fragment). Tomb 78. 

Amarna, i, pis. 15, 26; ii, pis. 11,13; m, pk 31 ; Wreszinski, Atlas, ii, pis. 84, 192, 194. 

^7 Op. cit., II, pi. 84. Op. cit. ,11, pi. 20o;aslightly variant form Nelson, df^ifnzefH^26M(i), pi. 42. 

For other standards of a religious nature see below, p. 16. 



clear that their use was confined to ceremonial occasions, and good examples are found 
in the distinctively ‘regimental’ standards at Der el-Bahri. One of the most interesting 
of these parade-standards is that of ‘The Plumed Horse’ (fig. 12).^ This, curiously 
enough, is not borne by chariotry, but by the {sic, read °) 

‘troops of Thebes and recruits of the soldiery of the entire land’, who 
march on foot. The horse is represented as white with a red outline. Another horse- 
standard depicted in a private tomb, though unfortunately damaged (fig. 13),^ clearly 
did belong to the chariotry, since it is carried by a man with two horses, while behind 
him follow two more horses. Another parade-standard from Der el-Bahri consists of 
the prenomen of Queen Hatshepsut surmounted by horns, plumes, and uraei (fig. i4),3 
while another in the same group of men consists of upraised Aa-arms with the hiero- 
glyph ^ between them; on the upraised hands are still visible the lion-paws of what 
was probably a crowned sphinx in standing posture (fig. 15). These two standards are 
borne by the iti S' ‘troops of Upper and 

Lower Egypt, young men of Thebes, and recruits of Khonthonnufer’. In the upper 
register of the same scene two squads of | ‘trained soldiers (.?)’ have standards 

consisting respectively of a falcon-head with disk and plumes and a plumed human 
head, possibly with reference to the gods of the localities whence they were recruited 
(figs. 16 and 17). In the tomb of Nebamun (No. 90) there is a similar standard con- 
sisting of disk and plumes on the dad-siga (fig. 18).''^ The naval detachments also had 
their special parade-standards. The ‘crews of the king’s ships’ bear 

a most elaborate standard consisting of a Seated crowned figure (probably intended for 
Queen Hatshepsut, though in its present state the face is more like that of Khnum) 
in a bark of state, the whole surmounted by a fan (fig. 19),^ while another squad of 
marines has a ‘Lion and Fan’ standard (fig. 20).* Another naval standard is the 
‘Falcon and Ostrich-Plume’ (fig. 21).'^ A standard belonging to the armed police of the 
capital is the ‘Gazelle and Ostrich-plume’ (fig. 22).® 

Closely associated with the military standards already described are some curious 
objects pendent from long staves, which assume the most varied forms, see figs. 23-30.^ 
They are borne by the soldiers exactly as if they were standards, but not infrequently 
they appear alongside ^-standards as if supplementing them in some way.'° In the case 
of fig. 30 the colours are preserved; the long pendant like a pointed bag, which hangs 
from a lotus-flower, is red, while the band across the upper part is yellow with red 

^ Deir el Bahariy pi. g i . All the parade^standards from this source have been redrawn with fuller detail by 
Mrs. Davies, and it is from her drawings that the figures have been prepared. 

2 Tomb 85 (unpublished). ^ pi. 155, lower register. Tzco Officials y p\. zy, 

5 Deir el Bahariy pi. gi ; similar standards pi. 155 and on an unpublished fragment from pi. 122. 

^ Op. cit.y pi. 126. 

7 Davies and Gardiner, i/wy, pi. 5. A standard of the Hathor-cow on what is apparently a private yacht. 
Ancient Egyptian PaintingSy pi. 28, may possibly be the owner’s private idol or ensign. 

® Tu'o Officials y pi. 26. In pL 27 it is borne by a ‘lieutenant of police’. 

^ Fig. 23, Deir el Bahariy pi. gi, on board a ship of state, cf. also pi. 153; fig. 24, op. cit.y pL go, borne by 
soldiers ashore ; figs. 25 and 26, Davies, ICen-amuny pi. 22 a, among other military equipment. Figs. 27 and 28 
Amarnay i, pi. 16; fig. 2g, op. cit.y i, pi. ag; fig. 30, from Tomb 56, I owe to Mrs. Davies, 
e.g. Deir el Bahariy pl* 91 i Amarnay I, pi. 26. 



lines. To me the materials of which these objects were made and the purpose for which 
they were intended are alike obscure ; it is difficult to believe that they were regimental 
standards in the ordinary sense of the word. 

In addition to the ‘regimental’ standards already discussed, the Egyptians appear to 
have had ‘divisional’ standards, corresponding to the main divisions of the Egyptian 
army, which were named after the principal gods of the realm ; at the battle of Kadesh 
under Ramesses II the divisions mentioned are those of Amun, Re^, Ptah, and Seth. 
Of these ‘divisional’ or ‘army’ standards, however, only one has been recorded, namely 
a standard of Amun w’hich preceded King Ramesses III on the march (fig. 31).^ This 
consisted of the ram’s head of Amun crowned with the solar disk and erected on a tall 
pole mounted in a chariot driven by a single man ; on the front of the pole, below the 
ram’s head, appears a statuette of the king, who is thus placed under the protection 
of the god. That this standard actually represents the god leading the Egyptian armies 
to victory is made clear by the accompanying inscription, in which Amen-Re^, King of 
the Gods, promises to Ramesses III a triumph over his foes. This has already been 
noted by Schafer, who points out that an exactly similar custom existed in the armies of 
Assyria.^ Fig. i of his article shows the Assyrian chariot-standard going into action, 
while fig. 3 depicts an Assyrian camp wfith offerings being made to the standards by priests, 
which is conclusive proof of their divine nature. It seems safe to assume that the Egyptian 
army-divisions of Re', Ptah, and Seth w ere likewise under the protection of similar 
symbols of their respective gods, even though no pictures of their ensigns have survived. 

Of the title of the men who bore the ensigns of the Egyptian army we have already 
made brief mention. Each regiment of the army or ship of the navy appears to have 
had its own standard, and the standard-bearer ranked as an officer; according to Helck^ 
he commanded a ^ 1 ‘regiment’ or ‘company’ of 200 men, but was himself subordinate 
to the hry-pdt ‘troop-commander’. In its full form the title of ‘standard-bearer’ in- 
cludes the name of the unit in which this officer served; thus in the army we find 
mention of the standard-bearers of the following regiments : 

s} n hm-f ‘His Majesty’s Regiment’ (The King’s Own), Spiegelberg, Rechnimgen, 
86 (No. 19 e). The royal bodyguard? 

sj’ n Nht-hkf-Izvnw ‘the regiment Victorious-is-the-Ruler-of-On’ , Turin 166. 

sf n Rr-n-hhw ‘the regiment Sun-of-Rulers’ , Golenischeff, Hammamat, i. 

Si nNb-mict-Rr Itn-thn ‘the regiment of King Nehmare^ Aton-gHtters’ , Br. Mus. 1210. 
Apparently a corps d' elite, compare ‘The King’s Own’ above. 

ss n mgiw Hrr-n-f-Itn ‘the regiment of skirmishers (?)^ Aton-appears-for-him’, Davies, 
Amarna, iii, pi. 12. 

In a number of instances the word is omitted, and in such cases it may be uncertain 
whether the following name refers to a regiment or a ship. The following examples 
may be quoted : 

Ki-m-Ti-Sty ‘Bull in Nubia’, JEA xx, 155. Almost certainly a regiment. 

1 Nelson, MedinetHabu(l), pi. 17. A similar standard clearly referred tobyTuthmosis III, Urk. iv, 652, 15-16. 

2 KliOy VI, 393 ff. ^ Einfluss der Militdrfiihrer in der i 8 . dgyptischen Dynastie, 37. 

On this rendering of mg>'w s^tJEA v, 50, n. 6. 



Mn-hprw~Rc-sksk-Hr ‘Tuthmosis IV, destroyer of Syria’, Louvre C202d 

Sisf-Hts ‘Repeller of the Khetes-folk’, Vienna 79. 

Hc-m-mict ‘Manifest in Justice’, Spiegelberg, op. cit. 89 (9 c). Probably not a ship 
in this instance, though a ship of this name is known. 

Apart from named regiments we find these officers in various kinds of auxiliary 
troops. Thus there are standard-bearers of recruits {nfrw ) of mercenaries (.^) (iwryt) of 
Sherden mercenary troops of Tjuk-troops probably Libyan mercenaries; 

of ‘the West of the City’, i.e. the necropolis police;^ and of temple militia or police.^ 
One officer entitled ‘standard-bearer of the army’ {mscy> may possibly have had charge 
of one of the divisional standards discussed above. 

On the naval side we have standard-bearers of named ships. Their titles assume 
various forms, so that we have ( i ) py sryt n im nsw X ‘standard-bearer of the king’s 
ship X’ f (2) n im X ‘of the ship X’ (3) n X ‘of the X’, with the word im omitted, but 
with the boat- determinative after the name;” and (4) nhntytnX ‘of the sailors of the X’,*^ 
There is also a standard-bearer n ps im n ti rh;t ‘of the warship’, the name of whose ship 
is lost. ^ 3 TJie following list gives the names of ships of which standard-bearers are known: 

rnh-zvP-snb-hpr-r-Kmt ‘Prosperity has befallen Egypt’, Spiegelberg, op. cit. 83 (ii). 

Pth-r-lut-f'Vtzh. is before him’, op. cit. 85 (18). 

Mji-r^-hprw-Rc ‘Amenophis II is firmly established’, op. cit. 82 (7 a). 

Mry-Imn ‘Beloved of Amun’, Davies, Two Officials, pi. 26; Spiegelberg, op. cit. 82 (8), 
83 (12), 85 (19). 

Nfrw-ltn ‘Beauty of the Aton’, Louvre C207 = op. cit. 83 (10). The reading nfrw 
is due to Gardiner, Spiegelberg having thn. 

JTit-nfrw ‘Foremost of Beauty’, op. cit. 85 (21). 

Ifr-m-ipt ‘IManifest in Ope’, op. cit. 84 (13). 

Hr-m-jnwt ‘Manifest injustice’, op. cit. 83 (9). 

Shtp- . . . ‘Propitiating . . .’, op. cit. 84 (14). 

Rrms-mi-lmn-shtp-ltn ‘Ramesses-miamun who propitiates the Aton’, op cit. 84 (16). 

Thn-mi-Itn ‘Glittering like the Aton’, op. cit. 84 (15). 

Whether the military standards of Egypt were considered to be the embodiment of 
the honour of the regiment or ship to the same extent as, say, the eagle of a Roman 
legion, may perhaps be doubted, but that some attachment was felt for them is suggested 
by the fact that the bearer of the standard was an officer of some rank, about whom it 
doubtless shed an aura of additional authority. Whether it was considered a disgrace 
to lose your standard in battle we do not know, but it is safe to assume that the sight 
of his standard swaying over the press on occasion inspired the Egyptian soldier to 
feats of valour of which he would otherwise have been incapable. 

^ Classed by Spiegelberg as a ship-name, o/). aG, 83 (8 Z^). ^ Op. cit.y 9, by 3, 5. 

3 P,Jnd. Tiiririy 2, 4; 6, 7; for the translation 'mercenaries* cf. Amarnay vi, pi. 17. 

Several in P. Wilbour, e.g. 27, 43 ; 47, 13 J bi, 44. ^ Wilbouty 46, 28. ^ Two OfficialSy 29. 

'Standard-bearer of the temple of Amun*, P. Br. AIus. X0054, rt. 2, 14 — Peet, Tomb-robberies y pi. 6. 

^ De Rouge, Inscr. Hierogl. 264. The publication has ^ cross-hatched, but the reading is hardly doubtful. 

Tzeo Officiary pi. 26; Spiegelberg, op. cit. 83 (9 a). Spiegelberg, op. cit.y 84 (13). 

” Op. cit.y 82 (8). Qp^ cit.y 82 (7 a)y 83 (12). 13 Qp^ cit.y 82 (5). 



The present article, though not wholly confined to texts hitherto untranslated, aims 
principally at bringing to the notice of scholars certain little studied documents that 
may provide a background to the great Wilbour papyrus about to be published by the 
Brooklyn Museum. That papyrus, which dates from the reign of Ramesses V, is in 
sheer bulk of written matter the largest of all Egyptian secular m.anuscripts, and 
affords more information about land-tenure and the assessment of land than we ever 
dreamt of recovering. At the same time it raises problems that I cannot solve single- 
handed, and it is to be hoped that the translations here offered will enable others with a 
better understanding of economic problems to clear up at least some of the difficulties, 

§ 1 . Passages from the Miscellanies 

Let us start with new renderings of some relatively familiar passages from the 
Miscellanies, or collections of heterogeneous short compositions, which I recently 
gathered together in a single volume.^ Here is a piece professing to be addressed by a 
teacher to his pupils, and evidently modelled on the so-called Satire des metiers^ a much 
admired Middle Kingdom text contrasting the advantages of the scribe with the miseries 
of other callings.- 

I am told you have abandoned writing and taken to sport, that you have set your face towards 
work in the fields and turned your back upon letters. Remember you not the condition of the 
cultivator faced with the registering of the har\xst-tax, when the snake has carried off half the corn and 
the hippopotamus has devoured the rest ? The mice abound in the fields. The locusts descend. The 
cattle devour. The sparrows bring disaster upon the cultivator. The remainder that is on the 
threshing-floor is at an end, it falls to the thieves. The value of the hired cattle ( ?)^ is lost. The yoke 
of oxen has died while threshing and ploughing. And now the scribe lands on the river-bank and 
is about to register the harvest-tax. The janitors cariy^ staves and the Nubians rods of palm, and they 
say, Hand over the corn, though there is none. The cultivator is beaten all over, he is bound and 

^ Gardiner, Late-Egyptian ?^IisceUanics, Brussels, 1Q37. 

- In the whole range of Eg\'ptian literature there is no less intelligible or more corrupt piece of writing than 
this, at least as found in the nvo principal manuscripts, Sallier II and Anastasi VII, and on ostraca. The 
difficulties may be realized from the excerpts given in Erman's Literatur dcr Aegyptcr, 100 ff., or from Black- 
man’s translation of the same work, 67 ff. A writing-board giving a far better text of certain portions has been 
published by Piankoff in Revue dEgyptologie, i, 51 ff. 

3 (P/) rg/t'f m bif is obviously one of those fanciful substantival expressions dear to the Egyptians. If the 
literal meaning is ‘its hoof in copper’ the allusion may be to the money represented by the cattle hired out for 
use in the fields. In two other places it occurs in connexion with some such agricultural operations, see Mariette, 
Pap. Boulaq XII ^ Rec. Trav. xv, 142, and the related Cairo papyrus published ZAS xix, 1 19. Wb. i, 235, 8 is 
on the same track, but suggests that the reference may be to the lent cattle themselves. The previous explana- 
tions ZAS XXXII, 13 1 ; XXXI v, 167, are clearly wrong. 



thrown into the well, soused and dipped head downwards. His wife has been bound in his presence, 
his children are in fetters. His neighbours abandon them and are fled. So their corn flies away. 
But the scribe is ahead of everj’one. He who works in writing is not taxed, he has no dues to pay. 
Mark it well. 

This graphic, if over-coloured, picture of the farmer’s troubles was extremely 
popular in the Ramesside schools, and my not very literal version is based on the 
readings of four separate papyri. ^ That the collection of the corn-tax was often carried 
out with great brutality agrees with all we know of Egyptian ways right down to the 
nineteenth centur}’. The passage introduces us to many traits and words that we shall 
encounter repeatedly later. IVIention is often made of the scribe whose presence was 
necessar}^ to check the amount of the tax with the assessment-lists, and the expressions 
used for the ‘registration’ sphrY that he performed and for the ‘harvest-tax’ 

(= hnw) that he collected were common technical terms. The second of the two 
deserv^es further discussion. Ultimately it seems identical with smw ‘summer’, 

in Coptic ujtoAi. This, used concretely to mean the principal produce of the summer, 
yields the sense ‘harvest’, employed primarily no doubt of the entire crop gathered in 
by the owner of the fields. Secondarily, however, it signifies that part of the crop which 
had to be delivered as ‘harvest-tax’ to the Crown^ or to a temple^ as landlord — the 
exact scope of the term in Ramesside times remains to be determined.^ In Coptic 
ujtxjjui is used to translate ^ opoSj and Crum renders ‘tribute’, ‘tax’; the connexions with 
‘harvest’ and ‘summer’ are here eclipsed. The ‘janitors’ or ‘door-keepers’ 
iryw-r^) who accompanied the scribe were evidently burly fellows well able to use such 
compulsion as might be required, and we shall find them again in the tax-collecting 
papyrus at Turin dealt with in § 2. 

A similar picture, but one which adds several new details, is given in a Turin 
Miscellany not greatly studied hitherto 

Be a scribe. Place that profession in your heart and do not shirk, or I will put you to be a culti- 
vator, tied down to (pay) 300 sacks of com and set in charge of too many fields, two-thirds^ of them 
full of weeds, these more abundant than the corn-seed. You are too down-hearted to scatter the 
seed (?),^ you let it fall on the ground and nod compliance (saying) ‘I will do if. Then you come 

^ Gardiner, op. cit., 64-5; see too Erman, op. cit.y 246, with Blackman, op. cit.^ 193. 

2 Sphr in the same sense also P. Bologna 1086, 24; P. Leyden 3 jo, rt. 8 == Cemy, Late Ramesside Letters, 9; 
also the passage from a Turin Miscellany translated from a more complete text below, n. 4. 

3 A good example is Bilgai stela, 11 . 16-17 (= ZAS L, 49 ff.), where smw is coupled with s^yt, the word 
rendered 'dues’ at the end of our passage. So too Lefebvre, Inscr. cone, les grands pretres, 35, 16; 42, 10. 

^ e.g. P. Leyden 34^, vs. 9, i (= L.-E. IMtsc., 135) *• • • and I stood waiting for the ships which convey by 
water the harvest-tax {hnw) of the House of Ptah under the authority of my Lord . . ; P. Turin A, vs. i, 2-4 

(= op. cit., 121, corrected and completed by a newly found fragment) ‘. . . and you shall register the harvest- 
taxes (P I cz=i^ ^ House of Amen-Re<, King of the Gods, which are in the southern 

province, and you shall load them upon the vessels of the House of Amen-Re^, King of the Gods, w’hich are 
under the authority of Pay, the stable-master of the Residence’. I intentionally omit references to P. Wilbour, 
since this article is intended only to supply illustrative material. 

5 In Sallier /, 9, 7 (= op. cit., 87) hnw is extended to mean the fields from which the harvxst-taxes due to 
Pharaoh were derived. 

^ P. Turin A, vs. 2, 2-9 ~ op. cit., 122-3. 

^ The reading (see the publication by Pleyte & Rossi) was not recognized in my edition. 

8 The phrase appears to mean literally ‘to catch hold of dust’ ; I can think of no other interpretation. 



at time of ... to see what you have done and find it red and sticking to the ground, it has fastened 
on the stone. The yoke of oxen that you took to plough has fallen in the mire.' The herdsman 
is come to take it back, and you stand confounded. The overseer of cattle is come to make his round 
of inspection, and you are placed in the position of saying, They are not there. You are fined the 
two cows, their calves being removed. Mark it well. 

Rare or unknown words made it impossible to give more than a paraphrase, but I 
have some confidence of having caught the main drift. The reference to the hired 
oxen amplifies what was stated very obscurely in the previous passage, and the part 
played by the overseer of cattle is interesting. It must be remembered, however, that 
both these excerpts probably date from a period anterior to Ramesside times. In this 
later period oxen were regularly used for threshing as well as ploughing; but 
curiously enough our ostraca refer only to the borrowing of the donkeys employed for 
bringing in the harvest. ^ 

Of greater importance for our present object, however, is the light thrown by the 
Turin passage on the status of the ihzvty {rhwty) ‘cultivator’, as I have 

translated the word throughout this article. The assessment of 300 sacks is considerable, 
if we accept the current and probable view that the sack or khar of corn was equivalent 
to 2 bushels .3 I am indebted to Prof. J. A. S. Watson for the information that 600 
bushels of barley, and possibly also of spelt, would amount to about 14 tons and 
demand a space of about 770 cubic feet, i.e. over 9 feet in every direction. This fact, 
and indeed the mere fact of his being assessed at all, indicate that the ihwty was more 
than a simple farm labourer. We shall come across a number of other large assessments, 
the figure in one case {P. Louvre 3171, 3, i, below, p. 57) being as high as 1,421 sacks. 
Thus the ihwty, at least in one sense of the word, is comparable to the Ptolemaic 
yeaipyog or ‘tenant-farmer ’,4 though the relation of such a man to the State or to his 
immediate employers requires much more investigation. It is right, however, to point 
out that in other Ramesside passages ihwty undoubtedly means simply a farm or field 
labourer, for which occupation there appears to have been no other common singular 
term .5 This signification is evident in P. Bologna 1086, 9 ff. 

I have investigated (the matter of) the Syrian of the House of Thoth about whom you wrote to me. 
I found he had been put as field labourer of the House of Thoth under your authority in year 3, 
second month of the Summer season, day ro, from among the slaves of the ship’s cargo brought 
back by the commander of the fortress. . . . 

* All this part is much altered and expanded in P. Lansing, 6, 3 ff. In the translation JEA xi, 289, the 
authors do not seem to have realized that the oxen were hired from the herdsman. 

^ Cerny, Ostr. hier. . . . Deir el Medineh, nos. 

3 I bushel ~ 36*347 litres. 

^ This view was enounced by me on different evidence Eg, Gram., 500, n. 5, on T 24, and I am pleased to 
note Glanville’s agreement with it in his commentary on P. Brit. Mus. 1044J, for which see below, § 5. 

5 Demotic has -wt, in Coptic oyoeie, for which latter Spiegelberg, Kopt. Handzcorterh., s.v., suggests 
Eg. f'wi ‘reap’ as the et\Tnology, on the authority of Sethe. Wb. i, 171, 18 does not quote any such title, but in 
the Dyn. XVIII tomb of Ipusonb at El-Kab I copied which may mean ‘reaper of 

His Majesty’. This, however, cannot have been a very generally used appellation. 

^ Latest edition by Wolf, ZAS lxv, 89 ff. This letter is of considerable importance for agricultural life at 
the period, but presents difficulties with which I cannot here attempt to cope. 



So too in the other and longer Bologna papyrus 

Another communication for my Lord’s good pleasure, to the effect that two of the field labourers 
of the mine-\c^nd of Pharaoh which is under my Lord’s authority have fled before the face of the 
stable-master Neferhdtep, he having beaten them. And now, look, the fields of the mineAznd of 
Pharaoh which are under my Lord’s authority are abandoned and there is no one to till them. This 
letter is for my Lord’s information. 

Accordingly we must always, in studying Late Egyptian texts in which the word 
ih'it.'ty figures prominently, bear in mind these two possibilities: either it may 
mean ‘farmer’, ‘cultivator’, or else it may mean ‘field labourer’. Note further that the 
phrase di r ihzcty ‘put someone to be an ihicty' is by no means a rare one.^ 

In the Bologna letter the phrase is used of a Syrian slave who has been made a field 
labourer, of course without being consulted. But in the Turin passage the lazy pupil 
is threatened with the fate of becoming an ihwty of the superior kind, so that even this 
position cannot have been regarded as enviable. One is reminded of the arbitrary way 
in which the Ptolemies settled their veterans on the land, finding in that course an easy 
method of extending the cultivated area. 

Other passages from the 'Miscellanies are either of little interest or not imimediately 
relevant to the topics here to be considered. ^ One or two exceptions are reserved for 
my commentary on the Wilbour papyrus. The texts on the verso of Sallier IV may well 
be copies of original documents, and for that reason are not given here, but further 
below in § 7. 

§2. P. Turin 1895-P2006 

This is a report by the well-known scribe of the Necropolis Dhutmose on his collec- 
tion of taxes at various places south of Thebes. Facsimiles of the hieratic text are given 
in Pleyte and Rossi’s publication, but in a disjointed and disorderly fashion, and the 
connexion with the first page, also given in facsimile, was not, I believe, recognized 
until my first stay in Turin in 1905.-^ The transcription then made was re-collated in 
1938, and I hope to include it in my Ramesside Administrative Documents, a preliminary 
instalment of which has been already issued. The text is translated below in its entirety,^ 
but the sequence is interrupted from time to time to give such explanations as seemed 
necessary. I have tried to preserve, so far as possible, the general disposition of the 
original, or at least to follow the intention of the scribe as regards the line-endings and 
the spacing. Rubricized words at the beginning of lines are shown by small capitals, 
and rubricized numbers — we shall find the colour to have been of real significance — by 

^ P. Bologna iO() 4 , iff. = L,-E. Misc., 3. 

^ See further P.-P. ^Iisc.y ii, 1 . 9; 16, 1 . 14. As pLinishment, Nauri decree, 73. 118. 

3 Complaints of excessive taxation : Anast. P, 27, 3-7 (= L.-E. Misc., 71—2), of considerable importance, but 
defective; P. Bologna iog4, 5,8 — 7, i {—op. cit., 5-6) deals with various commodities, but not with com. 
Collection of taxes, but not corn: P. Chester Beatty V, 7, 12—8, 6, see too my Text volume, pp. 48-9, and 
below, p. 67. 

4 p. I (in larger writing than the rest) Pleyte & Rossi, Pap. Turin, pi. 65, c; p. 2 == pL 100; p. 3 -- pi. 155 (in 
part loi) ; p. 4 — pL 156; p. 5 = pi. 157 (in part 97). Of the verso only p. i has been published, namely op. cit., 
pi. 96. Pending the publication of a complete transcript the student will be able to control my translation by the 
published facsimile, which is moderately good. 

5 An inadequate transcript and partial rendering of the first page will be found in Spiegelberg, Rechmingen, 34. 


italics. Note that, in most dates, the months and days are given in red, though, for 
superstitious reasons, not the years ; these last facts I have also tried to indicate in my 
own fashion. 

I, I Year 12, second month of the Inundation season, day i6, under His iMajesty the King of 
Upper and Lower Egypt, the Lord of the Two Lands, Menmafre'-setpen[ptah, the son of Re', 
I, 2 the Lord of Diadems], ' Ra'messe-kha'emwese-mereramun, the god ruler of Heliopolis, 
given life eternally [and for ever . . .]. 

I, 3 Document of receipts of com of khato-\a.n 6 . of Pharaoh from the hand of* the prophets [of the 
I, 4 temples of Upper Eg^'pt which r] ' the fan-bearer on the right of the King, the Royal scribe, 
I, 5 the general, the overseer of granaries of [Pharaoh,^ the King’s son of] Cush, the commander 
of southern lands, the leader of the troops [of Pharaoh]^ Penhasi [ordered to be delivered?]. 

I, 6 Done by Dhutmose, the scribe of the great and noble Necropolis of Millions [of Years of 

1, 7 [Brought] to the necropolis [of] the corn of khato-lznds of Pharaoh by the hand of the prophet 
of Such[us Pheni]. 

I, 8 [Summary]^ of receipt of it : 

The bottom third of the page is lost. It was probably blattk, since p. 2 appears to be the 
direct continuation. 

The reign is that of Ramesses XI, the last of the Ramessides, under whom the 
Royal son of Cush Penhasi, after quelling disturbances in Middle Egypt, became the 
principal personage of the realm. The events of the period and the controversies that 
have arisen over the dynastic facts are excellently summarized in Drioton and Vandier’s 
volume L’Egypte in Clio, Introduction aux etudes historiques, 352-3 and 372-3. The 
reason why we find the collection of the taxes entrusted to a ‘scribe of the Necropolis’ 
(or ‘of the Royal Tomb’, if that translation of be preferred) doubtless is 

that the corn in question was destined for the rations or wages diw) of the 

Necropolis workmen. This is suggested by a nearly contemporary letter published by 
Cerny {Late Ramesside Letters, 69-70), where we read: ‘Send your scribe with Efnamun 
the scribe of the Necropolis, the janitor Dhutmose or the janitor Khensmose. Let 
them go to fetch the corn, lest the people hunger and stop work upon the command of 
Pharaoh.’ We shall see later that the two janitors named in this letter are the ver}' same 
as accompanied the scribe Dhutmose on the mission to the south described in our 
Turin papyrus. 

The expression ‘Ma/o-lands of Pharaoh’ has long been known, but 

further light is thrown by the Wilbour papyrus on the Royal possessions called by that 
name. Apparently they were fields set apart to supply revenue to the Crown from among 

> m-drt. Throughout this article it has been deemed advisable to render ‘by the hand of’ or ‘from the 

hand of’, as the case demanded, though neither translation makes very idiomatic English. 

2 So restored from the titles of Pay'onkh, Gauthier, Litre des rois, ni, 241. In Ostr. Cairo (ed. Cerny) 
25744. 25745 the viceroys Herihor and Pay^onkh show this title in the form ‘granary-overseer of the 
granaries of Pharaoh’, but there does not seem to be room for as much here. 

3 So too Pay^onkh, Gauthier, loc. cit, ; also of Penhasi himself, Pleyte & Rossi, op. cit., 66, 4-5. 

4 The trace suggests [ 5 j] and the entire phrase is found twice in an unpublished Turin papyrus (1903/180) 
known to me only from Peet’s note-book vn, 134. 136. 



estates often actually owned by some local temple, and the responsibility for the yield 
rested on the shoulders of the mayor of the locality, a prophet of some temple, or some 
other official of high rank; in the Wilbour papyrus the principal administrator of khato- 
lands was the Steward of Amun Usima^re^nakhte. There are indications that the khato- 
land was sometimes land which had been cultivated previously by some individual 
holder, as tenant of the temple, but which had reverted to the Crown. Another kind 
of Royal land was //2m^-land,^ but it is obscure in what way it differed from 


The prophet of Suchus mentioned in the last line but one is doubtless the Pheni of 
Imiotru, i.e. Gebelen, mentioned in 2, 2, It is strange that what is virtually the title- 
page to the entire document should have mentioned him alone. 

2, I Received in Year 12, second month of the Inundation season, day 16, in the town of 
2, 2 Imiotru by the scribe Dhutmose and the two janitors ‘ from the hand of the prophet of 
Suchus Pheni, the scribe Sahtnufe and the deputy-superintendent of the House of Suchus 
2, 3 Pwonesh, of the corn of khatoA ^ nd ^ of Pharaoh 54f sacks. The Northern Loam: from the 
2, 4 hand of the Medjoy-policeman AnLhatir, corn of harvest-tax 80 sacks. Total, I34i sacks. 
2, 5 Received in Year 12, second month of the Inundation season, day 21, on the roof of the 
2, 6 garner^ by the mayor of the West of the City Pwer^o, of the corn ' which the scribe of the 
Necropolis Dhutmose brought from the town of Imiotru. Entered into the first magazine 
2, 7 (named) The garner ' overflows*, 131J sacks; barley, ^ 5 sacks. Total, 136} sacks. 

2, 8 Received^ in Year 12, third month of the Inundation season, day 19, in the town of ^Agni 
2, 9 by the scribe of the Necropolis Dhutmose and the two janitors, * corn jjf. 3I sacks. 

^ See above, the passage translated on p. 22, and often in the Wilbour papyrus. 

^ Three nearly synonymous words for * granary’ are used in the papyrus. The commonest of them is snwt, 
but in our text this occurs only once, see 3, ii. Smyt, here treated as a masculine, is far rarer elsewhere, and 
for that reason is rendered ‘gamer’; cf. smmt below, p. 62, n. i. A still rarer word is s^yt, below, 5, 4; see Wb. 
IV, 420, 14, perhaps the only other known instance being Onom. Golenischeff 5,16, though see Feet’s note, Rhind 
Mathematical Papyrus ^ p. 80 (Gunn). The compartments of the smyt are here called mhr ‘magazines’, see 2, 
6; 5, 4; erroneously simply Ar, 3, 7; mhr also Sail, IV, vs. 10, 3. 4, below, p. 63. 

^ The common compound > presumably to be read it-m-it, is coupled with *spelt’ (fctoTe 

oAupa, see below, p. 28) in Pleyte & Rossi, op. cit.^ no, 6, and contrasted with it ibid., in, 12; so too {e.g.) 
Cemy, Ostr. hier, . . . P>eir el Medineh, no. 213 ; P. Amiens, vs. 2, x + g ; Sail. IV, vs. 14, 5-7. Below, however, 
in 4, 6, bdt ‘spelt’ is followed by simple it, which must there still have its special sense ‘barley’ like its 
Coptic descendant euoT, in Greek There can be no doubt that it-m-it likewise means ‘barley’, and I 

believe the existence of this compound is due to the fact that had by this time also acquired the more general 
meaning of ‘com’ ; so often in our papyms, in the phrase m m it n ‘of the corn of’ and in P. Amiens similarly, 
but without the article ; cf. hd ‘silver’ also in the general sense of ‘money’. On this view iUm~it means ‘barley as 
barley’, i.e. barley which is really barley. Cemy {Archiv Orientdlni, vi, 175, n. i) gives a slightly different 
explanation: ‘Prices’, he writes, ‘especially small sums, were often expressed by means of equivalent quantity 
of barley. In order to avoid this conception of the word “barley” one mostly said “barley as barley” 
{i.e. “barley in the form of actual barley”) when speaking of barley in natura.^ Though he was evidently 
on the same track, I doubt if Cemy clearly realized that it could have the general sense of ‘com’, which is 
unknown to the Berlin dictionary, where the compound it-m-it is completely ignored. In totals including 
both barley and spelt, the w^ord X b'® ss, from old shr, is used below in 4, 7. 11 and constantly in Ramesside 
times, but there is no reason for thinking that is so to be read in the phrases quoted above. For further 
examples of it-m-it see the article by Cemy already cited; that article deals with the fluctuations of grain prices 
in the Twentieth Dynasty, and must remain our best authority on such questions until the entire evidence of 
the ostraca and papyri has been systematically sifted and analysed. 

^ By way of exception this initial word of the line is written in black. 


2, 10 Arrived' and delivered to the scribe Nesamenope and the female musician of Amun 
2, II Hentowe in year 12, third month of the Inundation season, day 23, ^ ' corn, 33 sacks. 3^ ^ gk. 
Deficit, to the account of the fishermen, sacks, to the account of the fishermen [nr]. 

Total, sacks . 3 

2, 12 Received in the town of Imiotru by the scribe Dhutmose and the two janitors (delivered) by 
2, 13 the hand of • the foreigner-* Pkhal in Year 12, third month of the Inundation season, day 
28, 10 sacks. Total come from him ,5 183 - sacks. 

2, 14 Arrived and delivered to the mayor of the West of the City Pwer'o in Year 12, third month 
2, 15 of the Inundation season, day 29, of the ' corn of the foreigner Pkhal, 10 sacks; given to the 
cultivator Pbeki. 

The total of 183! sacks in 2, 13 shows the operations recorded in p. 2 to have been 
taken as a whole complete in itself, though extending over no less than forty-three days. 
The papyrus provides no explanation for that length of time, since the corn received 
at Gebelen on the i6th of the second month was delivered in Thebes on the 21st, 
while that received on the 19th of the third month at '^Agni, a little north of Esna,^ was 
delivered in Thebes on the 23rd. The distance from Esna to Luxor by river is about 
36 miles, about double that from Gebelen, and there would be no difficulty about 
accomplishing the longer of the two journeys dowmstream in the time indicated. It is not 
clear why the amounts from two different towns are added together, the more so since 
they were not received in the same month, and were disposed of differently on arrival. 

In collecting the taxes Dhutmose was assisted by two janitors or door-keepers, and 
we are reminded of the similarly described men found exercising a like function in the 
passage with which this article began. The identity of function increases the likelihood 
of the writing here being a mere abbreviation for the written there, in 

accordance with the view suggested by the Berlin dictionary (i, 165, 2). It is, however, 
a curious fact that the title of the two janitors of the Necropolis is regularly found in the 
shorter form, see Pleyte and Rossi, op. cit., 90, 4; 108, 4; 109, 16. 23. The assistants of 
the scribe Dhutmose are doubtless these Necropolis janitors. Though men of humble 
station — their rations were less than those of the Necropolis workmen — they do not 
remain anonymous. One was a namesake of the scribe Dhutmose, and the fact that he 
is said to be of ‘The -Mansion’, i.e. of Medinet Habu^ (4, 6), confirms the often voiced 
conjecture that the Necropolis administration was centred in that temple. The other 
was named Khensmose, and a small payment to him is recorded in 4, 3. A letter 

1 By way of exception this initial word of the line is written in black. 

2 The whole date is exceptionally in black. For this reason I print the word 'year' with a small initial letter. 

3 The number is omitted. It ought to have been 37, as confirmed by the grand total of 183! sacks below. 

The designation is quite general, meaning properly ‘speaking in a foreign language'. South of Thebes 

people of alien race who had settled on the land were regularly so described, and the verso of our papyrus 
provides particularly good evidence of their numbers. See further xil, 257-8; xiv, 67-8. In the Wilbour 
papyrus, which deals with the Fayyum and southwards, the Sherden play a similar part. 

5 The pronoun ‘him’ here must refer to the scribe Dhutmose, not to Pkhal, I hope, at no distant date, to deal 
with the expression A in a special note. 

^ For the town of ^Agni see Gauthier, Diet, geogr, i, 160, and a still better account by Junker in WZKyi xxxi 
(1924), 74-6. The local deity was Hathor, and a prophet of hers is mentioned in Cemy's letters, see op. cit., 
48, 1. 8. ^ See the article by Cemy, JEA xxvi, 128-30. 




already quoted couples the janitors Dhutmose and Khensmose together, and shows 
them engaged in the same kind of mission as here. 

At Gebelen the prophet Pheni shared his responsibility for the corn deliveries with 
two other temple-officials, of whom the scribe Sahtnufe is mentioned again in 5, 7, 
where we find further payments of corn in Gebelen a few months later. We may perhaps 
take it that ‘the Northern Loam’ where the policeman 'Ankhatir paid his tax was in the 
same neighbourhood. It is curious that no mention is made of the officials from whom 
the corn was collected at 'Agni. 

What adds a special interest to our papyrus is the fact that it not only records the 
details of the amounts collected as taxes, but also states the ways in which these 
amounts were disposed of on arrival at Thebes. A considerable portion was handed 
over to the well-known mayor of Western Thebes Pwer^o, by this time probably a 
man of some age, since the scandal of the tomb-robberies in which he played so 
important a part' took place at least fifteen years earlier. He is here mentioned by 
name in 2, 5. 14; 4, i, and alluded to in 4, 5. Most of the corn delivered to him was 
stored away in the granarv, presumably because not needed for immediate use. A little 
more than a sixth part was given to the scribe Nesamenope and to Hentowe, a 
female musician of Amun ; these two, presumably husband and wife, are mentioned 
together in 2,10; 3, 6, and the lady alone in 4, 8; 5, 3 ; and they occur also in the corre- 
spondence published by Cerny, see op. cit., Index, pp. 77-8. Among that correspon- 
dence is an important letter belonging to the Geneva museum {op. cit., p. 57) in which 
this same Hentowe writes to Nesamenope, there revealed to be a scribe of the 
Necropolis, about just such receipts of corn as are here described. I must leave to 
Cerny the task of translating and explaining the said letter, but it should be noted that 
the prominence of Hentowe in our papyrus is thence seen to have been due to her 
undertaking the duties of Nesamenope during his absence from Thebes. Also it must 
be added that the letter refers to the transport of the grain in question by a fisherman 
named Yetnufe (1. 13 of the letter), to whom we shall find a small payment in 4, 3. 
Lastlv, 10 sacks received at Gebelen from the foreigner Pkhal (mentioned again 
4, II ; 5, 2) were at Thebes handed over by the mayor Pwer^o to the cultivator Pbeki 
(2, 14-15) ; the reason is not clear. 

The account rendered by Dhutmose in this first section of his report balances fairly 
well, but there is at least one small discrepancy which arouses suspicion of ‘cooking’. 
In 2, 3-4, Dhutmose acknowledges having received at Gebelen 54f-r8o + i34f sacks, 
but this is two sacks short of the total recorded in 2, 7 as having been stored away in the 
granary at Thebes under the supervision of the mayor Pwer'o, and we shall find the 
amount of 136! sacks presupposed in the final total of i83f sacks. In 2, 3-4, the com- 
ponent items of the 134! sacks are both written in red, but in the amount of 136! sacks 
subsequently delivered at Thebes 131! sacks are written in red and the remaining 
5 sacks, written in black, are given as ^ it-m-it ‘barley’. Here we find for the first 
time evidence of a remarkable habit of Egyptian scribes applicable, not only to 
Ramesside times, but also to the Eighteenth Dynasty whenever black and red ink are 

‘ This I have described in JEA xxii, 185 ff. ^ For earlier times see Gunn’s note, below, p. 27. 


both being used, red ink is employed for | bdt 'spelt’ and black for it-m-it 

'barley’’, though subsequently when both kinds of grain are being added together as 
XI/® h ‘corn’ (see above, p. 24, n. 3) red ink may be used. Some of the evidence 
upon which this important generalization is based is given in the footnote,' and though 
I have not searched very widely, the examples are more than ample to justify my 
statement. So firmly rooted was the habit that, as Gunn points out to me, it is actually 
found in a mere story; the faithless wife of Anup is filled with desire for Bata, her 
husband’s younger brother, because she sees him carrying a load of ‘spelt ( | “ /® bdt) 
3 sacks and barley (/® it) 2 sacks, total 5’ ; and here the 3 and the total 5 are written in red, 
and the 2 in black.^ Henceforth, wherever we discover this contrast of colours in con- 
nexion with corn, we shall be justified in taking the black amount as referring to barlev, 
and the red amount as referring to spelt. A further important consequence henceforth 
to be held in view is that, since the amounts written in black are both smaller and fewer 
than those in red, most payments in corn, and especially tax-payments, were made in 
‘spelt’ {bdt), not in ‘barley’ {it). This agrees with the result of Griffith’s investigations ^ 
for the Twenty-fifth Dynasty and until Ptolemaic times, when ‘wheat’ {mpos, in Coptic 
coq'o, Egyptian swi) was substituted for spelt as the principal cereal, and ‘barlev’ 
took the second place.+ The supremacy of ™ it enoT ‘barley’ apparently belongs only 

* In our Turin papyrus the evidence is as follows: in 2, 7 the special reference to it-m-it accompanied by a 
number written in black presupposes that the unspecified cereal of which the amount precedes and is written 
in red must be of a different kind. Again in 4, 6 we find 8| sacks of bdt written in red and followed by 2 J sacks 
of it (here evidently synonymous with it-m-it) written in black; in the detailed account given of these in the 
following line the kinds of grain are not expressly named, but 7+ if = 8| sacks are written in red, and 
if-ri “ 25 sacks in black, i.e. in harmony with the previous indications. Yet again in 4, 9-10 three items 
of 4 ^i-t-iJ sacks are written in black, and an item of if sacks is written in red; in 5, 2-3 the first two of 
these items (the third and fourth are forgotten) are still in black, and in 5, 4 have evidently been added to an 
item of if sacks written in black in both 4, 1 1 and 5, 2 to form the black total of 6f sacks, while the amount 
of 12 sacks written in red immediately before these 6f sacks is clearly identical with the same amount written 
in red alike in 4, ii and again in 5, i, this amount being definitely stated to be bdt ‘spelt' in the latter place. 
Finally, in vs. 2, 9 there is a single black amount of 2 sacks contrasting violently with all the neighbouring red 
entries, and it is clear that here the black ink must have a reason. In the Amiens papyrus studied further on 
in this article there is a similar alternation of red and black figures, clearly marking a similar distinction, but 
the only quite explicit testimony is vs. 2, x — 9, where the figure accompanying it-m-it is in black, and that 
accompanying bdt is in red. In Pleyte ^ Rossi, op, cit., 91, all the numbers, including one example of it-m-it., 
are in black except those accompanying bdt, which are four and all in red. Even more striking are the accounts, 
op, cit., io8~ii : in 109 a total of it-m-it is given and followed by the items composing it, all in black; 109, 19 
and onwards a total of bdt is given in red, followed by itemized entries all with figures in red. For the Eighteenth 
Dynasty I can quote, not only the Louvre papyrus treated below, pp. 56-8, but also the accounts in P, Petersburg 
1 1 16 Aj versOy ed. Golenischeff, pi. 15 ; in both these documents black and red amounts of corn are juxtaposed, 
and the distinction of the two can be only for the same reason as has been demonstrated for Ramesside times. 
The above results had been already ascertained when I came across a partial observ ation of the same fact by 
Cerny, Ann, Sen:, xxvn, 209. He is there dealing with a Cairo ostracon (J. 51518) in which the rations of the 
Necropolis work-people are set forth. These rations were in grain, and Cerny says : ‘Ces grains etaient de deux 
sortes: les quantites de Tune sont ecrites a Tencre noire, celles de I’autre a Tencre rouge. Les quantites ex- 
primees en rouge sont toujours plus grandes que celles no tees en noir, excepte a la ligne 8 ou dies sont egales.' 

2 Tale of the Tzvo Brothers y 3 , 4-5 . According to the accepted view, the Ivr ‘sack’ is equivalent to 2 bushels. I am 
informed it would take a man of exceptional strength to carr\’ a load of 5 bushels for 100 yards, and here Bata is de- 
clared to have shouldered double that load ! ^ Ry lands Papyri, iii , 78, n. 1 1 , a detailed and highly valuable note. 

^ See the table in Grenfell & Hunt, Tebtunis Papyri, I, 562. Wheat was known in Egypt from the earliest 
time, always supposing that the word zzet, later szi^t, has not changed its meaning during its long history. 



to the Old and Middle Kingdoms^ Thus it seems possible to observe a deterioration 
of the corn in Ramesside and post-Ramesside times, and a subsequent improvement 
of quality when the Greek period is reached. It seems agreed that the ‘spelt’ so pro- 
minent in the Ramesside age and later was of the kind known scientifically as Triticum 
dicoccum or ‘starch-wheat’, a poor kind of cereal. ^ The same meaning is attributed by 
all authorities to the Greek oAupa,^ the word which Coptic renders by fcwTe, i.e. the 
old 4 bdt^ The Golenischeff Onomasticon (6, 8-9) distinguishes at least seven 
kinds of bdt, among them varieties called respectively ‘white’, ‘black’, and ‘red’. For 
this reason it seems hardly likely that the colour of the actual grain played a part in the 
scribe’s choice of inks. 

Returning now to the details of the figures, we see that at 'Agni Dhutmose received 
33f-r3f sacks, the former in red for spelt, and the latter in black for barley. The 
resultant 37 sacks added to the 1367 from Gebelen together with the subsequent 10 
from Pkhal yield the grand total of 183! sacks. The disposal of the 33f+3f sacks at 
Thebes is expressed (3, lo-ii) in a rather puzzling way, and though able to offer an 
explanation I am not sure it is the right one. If the ordinary practice was observed, the 
word for ‘deficit’ must refer to the figures that follow, not to those that precede; but 
this involves taking the second ‘to the account of the fishermen’ as tautologous and a 
mistake. Another curious point is that there is a small space after the number 33. None 
the less, it is obvious that the 33 sacks of spelt (because in red) paid to Nesamenope and 
Hentowe represent the 33! received at 'Agni, and that the payment of 3ii^(= 3i|) 
sacks of barley (because in black) represents the 37 sacks from that same town. It 
seems then likely that of the f (= 3if) sacks deducted for the fishermen, the f 
reducing the 33I received to the 33 sacks delivered will have been the amount paid for 
transport of the spelt, and the will have been the amount paid for the 

transport of the barley.^ It is barely an objection that the whole of the amount deducted 
is written in red, instead of partly in red and partly in black. 

Let it be recalled that units of the sack or khar fl- are written with the ordinary' 
integers, that units of its fourth part the ipt or oipe are shown as dots, and that 

fractions of the oipe are given in the so-called ‘eye’-notation; see my Eg. Gram., § 266, 
p. 198. Here I render all corn-measures in terms of the sack. 

To conclude these lengthy comments, the question must be raised whether, in spite 
of the presumption arising from the statement on the title-page (i, 3), some of the corn 
collected at Gebelen did not belong to some other category of tax than that derived 
from khato-hxiAs of Pharaoh. The amount received from the police-officer 'Ankhatir 

^ Note, however, that in the temple offerings only ‘barley’ (it) seems to have been used. At all events the 
Medinet Habu Calendar mentions only barley, this of two sorts, barley of Upper Eg\"pt and barley of Lower 
Egypt; other references for these, ZAS xliv, 19 ; also Kees, see in the next note. 

^ See the monographs quoted in Peet, Rhind Mathematical Papyrus, 1 14, n. i ; also Kees, Kulturgeschichte, 
31-2 ; Hartmann, Agriculture, 48-53. 

2 So (e.g,) Schnebel, Landwirtschaft, 98 ; Preisigke, Worterhuch, s.v. 

^ Crum, Coptic Dictionary, 45, gives as the meaning ‘durah’, and for this he seems to have some ground in 
Arabic translations. Schweinfurth, however, appears to have strenuously denied (see Hartmann, op. cit., 53) 
that durah, i.e. Sorghum vulgare, was known to the ancient Egyptians. 

5 See also the comments below on 4, 9-10. 


(2, 4) is described as f ® ‘corn of harvest-tax’, and looks as though it were 

contrasted with the preceding amount stated to have been received from the prophet 
of Suchos and his colleagues, this expressly designated as ‘of the corn of Mato-land of 
Pharaoh’. So too below in 3, 12 some corn delivered by the deputy-superintendent 
Pwer'o is said to have belonged to the ‘harvest-tax’ of the cultivator Sahtnufe.^ How- 
ever, we have no grounds for thinking that the returns from Mafo-lands could not be 
described by the term ‘harv’est-tax’ {smw), when thought of in relation to the farmer or 
official who paid or collected them.^ 

3, I Received^ at the City Year 12, fourth month of the Inundation season, day 12, of the corn 
of the House of Alont, Lord of Thebes, by the scribe Dhutmose of the Necropolis and the two 
3, 2 janitors, ' from the hand of Nesamun, the scribe of the counting of the House of Amen-Re', 
King of the Gods, who is under the authority of the prophet of Alont Amenemone, 6 sacks. 
3, 3 Details of it:+ ' the foreigner Penhasi, 4 sacks; the builder Krur, 2 sacks; total, 6 sacks. Given 
to the mason Irushare' of ( ?) the . . sack ( ?). 

3, 4 Received^ in ATar 12, fourth month of the Inundation season, day 13, in the house (called) 
‘The Portable Shrine of King Usimafre'-miamun’, by the scribe of the Necropolis Dhutmose 
3, s and the two janitors from the hand of 1 the female musician of Amun Alosh'enufe, the wife of 
the Master of the Portable Shrine Hrainufe, jo sacks. 

3, 6 Received in ATar 12, fourth month of the Inundation season, day 14, from the hand of the 
scribe of the Necropolis Dhutmose and the two janitors, by the female musician of Amun 
3, 7 Hentowe and the scribe Nesamenope, ■ of the corn of the Portable Shrine of King Usimacre'- 
miamun under the authority of the Alaster of the Portable Shrine Hrainufe, jo sacks. Entered 
into the first magazine ‘<The garner) overflows’. = 

3, 8 Received on this day of the corn of the House of Alont, Lord of Thebes, from the hand of 
the foreigner Usihenakhte, 8 sacks. Previously on fourth month of the [Inundation season, 
day i]2, 6 sacks; total 14 sacks. 

The first eight lines of p. 3 are separated from the second eight by a considerable gap, 
showing that they were regarded as a unity, though the receipts from the two sacred 
institutions are not totalled together like those of p. 2. The reason for the cohesion of 
these lines is that they refer to fiscal operations performed by Dhutmose during a short 
stay at his home in Thebes. In 3, 9 we find him leaving for the south with two boats. 
It follows of necessity that both the House of Mont and the Portable Shrine of Usima^re'- 
miamun (Ramesses HI) were at Thebes. For the former see my note JEA xxii, 
174, and for the word kniw contained in the latter ibid., with another example, 
op. cit. XI, pi. 38 = P. Mallet, rt. 2, 2-3. Finally there is further an example where the 
genitive is the name of a private person, P. Amiens, vs. 6, xfl-i, see below, p. 56, and 
lastly a damaged case occurs in the Griffith fragments, see below, p. 69. The particular 
Portable Shrine here mentioned occurs again in an unpublished part of the papyrus 

^ Doubtless not to be oon fused with the scribe Sahtnufe already encountered. 

2 In Sallier ii (= L.-E. Misc, 8i, L 9) we read ‘one is reaping the smw of the khato-l^nd of Pharaoh 
which is under the authority of my Lord very satisfactorily and in good quantiu^’, but here smw means simply 
‘harvest’, not ‘har\*est-tax’. 3 Exceptionally in black. 

+ wpt st, see TF^. i, 302, i, there ver\^ strangely separated from the word dealt with in 303,1. Griffith knew 
better, see his Hieratic Papyri . . .from Kahuriy 20. 

s The omitted part of the name is restored from 2, 6. So abbreviated also below in 5, 4. 



Pleyte and Rossi, op, cit., 61 ; whether, like the House of Mont, it belonged to the complex 
of sanctuaries at Karnak is unknown. The House of Mont was the northernmost 
building of that complex, and some of its high-priests had their tombs at Kumet 
Mur^ai on the West bank. Its localization at Karnak helps to explain why a ‘scribe of the 
counting’ — I fancy the title is rare at this period^ — belonging to the temple of Amen-Re^ 
was placed at the disposal of the priest of Mont. 

The entry (3,3) with regard to the mason with the strange name Irushare^ (Ranke, 
39, 20) appears to end, after some half-destroyed and unintelligible signs, with a red 
dot, i,e, I oipe or \ sack of spelt. This small item is forgotten when the 6 sacks to which 
it belonged are mentioned again in 3, 8. Further payments of the corn-tax for which 
the scribe Nesamun was responsible are mentioned below in 4, 6; 5, 6. 8. 10. ii. It is 
characteristic Egyptian inconsistency that Dhutmose, though giving a full account of 
the way in which the corn of the Portable Shrine was disposed of, omits to do the like 
for that from the temple of Mont. 

3, 9 Year 12, fourth month of the Inundation season, day 18, setting forth from the West of 
the City by the scribe of the Necropolis Dhutmose with the boat of the skipper Dhutweshbi 
and the boat of the fisherman (Kadore' ? 

3, 10 Received in the town of Esna in Year 12, fourth month of the Inundation season, day 20, 
by the scribe of the Necropolis Dhutmose and the two janitors, of the 402 sacks of corn of ^ 
3, II the House of Khnum and Nebu from the hand of the deputy-superintendent Pwer<o and the 
temple-scribe Penhasi in the granar}^ of Khnum and Nebu at Esna, sacks. Details of it: 
3, 12 Received on this day from the hand of the deputy-superintendent Pwer^o:^ the cultivator 
3, 13 Sahtnufe, of his harvxst-tax, 120 sacks. ‘ Again from his hand and the cultivator Butehamun 
and the cultivator (Nakht r;amun,‘^ 80 sacks. Again from their hands, 6| sacks. Again from 
3, 14 their hands, 13 j sacks. Total 220 sacks, put upon the boat of • the skipper Dhutweshbi. 

3, 15 Received from their hands on this day by the scribe Dhutmose. Put upon the boat of the 
fisherman Kad 5 re, g8j sacks (and) 24^ sacks total, 12 jj sacks. 

3, 16 Total, 343 } sacks. Given for the expenses,^ 6j sacks. [Placed?] to (the credit of) Pharaoh, 

33 j sacks. Balance on the account of the temple-scribe Penhasi, 65 sacks. Total, 402 sacks. 

4, I Received in Year 12, fourth month of the Inundation season, day 24, by the mayor of the 

West of the City Pwer^o, of the corn brought by the scribe of the Necropolis Dhutmose and 
4, 2 the two janitors > in the boat of the skipper Dhutweshbi and the boat of the fisherman Kad5re, 

^ Presumably the title is a shortening of what was written in Dyn. XVIII as 'scribe, counter of the grain of 
Amun in the Granary of Divine offerings’, see Gardiner & Weigall, Top. Cat.y no. 231, cf. also nos. 38, 82, 179. 

2 As above in 3, 7 a word has been omitted at the end of the line. Here it is the personal name Kad5re, 

for which see 3, 15 ; 4, 2. 3. His boat was of the kind called U I I > though of this the element [ has 
been carelessly left unwritten. Since in the sequel Kadore’s boat is written simply | like that of Dhutweshbi it 
is probable that the word for ‘boat’ in this text is to be read kr everywhere. However, in Cemy’s letters 
{op. czY., 58, 1. 3) a fisherman’s boat that carried com is described as * 

3 This heading is pure repetition and quite superfluous. 

^ Part of the name is erroneously omitted. My suggestion assumes that ^ , the determinative of 'cultivator*, 
is to be read a second time as Nakht-. 

5 It is strange to find these two amounts in red juxtaposed, but the previous lines leave no doubt that they 
are correctly so written. Perhaps the smaller amount came from the scribe Penhasi. 

‘ For this sense of cf. ^ ro ^ iTi U\\ P i i ‘Given to them 

for expenses of the boat in which they are, i sack’ in the unpublished part of the Turin papyrus, Pleyte 
& Rossi, op. cit.j 68'9; from Feet’s note-book v, 129. 


4, 3 from the town of Esna, J57 sacks. Details of it : Arrived and delivered to the mayor, ' of the 
com of the fisherman Kadore, 110} sacks. Given as rations to the fisherman Yetnufe i sack; 
total JJj/- sacks. Deficit, 2 sacks. The details of the deficit; the janitor Khensmose, ij sacks. 
4, 4 Nesamenope, {- j sack; Kadore, f sack.' 

4, 5 Arrived and delivered to the mayor of the West of the City, of the corn of the skipper 
Dhutweshbi, 203- sacks. Given for the expenses of the skipper, 20 sacks. Total, 225 sacks. 

In this, the clearest and in some ways the most interesting section of the papyrus, 
there is unmistakable evidence that the accounts have been faked. The explanations 
down to the arrival of the boats at Thebes are impeccable, at least so far as the figures 
are concerned. From 3, lo-ii it appears that the temple at Esna of Khnum and his 
consort Nebu^ (earlier Nbt-w, ‘Alistress of the region’) was assessed with a tax 

of 402 sacks, out of which 337 sacks were immediately paid, this being the part for 
which the deputy-superintendent Pwerm was personally responsible, while his colleague 
the temple-scribe Penhasi, mentioned again in connexion with the same temple in 
vs. 3, 2. 3, was left with a liability of 65 sacks to be paid later (3,16). In point of fact 
the deputy-superintendent (not to be confused with the Theban mayor of the same 
name) had managed to squeeze 343^ sacks out of the three cultivators concerned, and 
this amount was actually shipped to Thebes in the two boats (3, 16). To bring these 
343 j sacks down to 337 Dhutmose at once deducts 6j sacks for expenses (3, 16). Of 
the 3434 sacks shipped 220 were placed on Dhutweshbi’s boat and 123J on that of 
Kadore, the items composing these (i20-r8o-r6f-f- 13! = 220; qSf -f 24! = 123^) 
adding up correctly. Arrived at Thebes, however, Dhutmose feels it incumbent upon 
him to account for these two freights, and forgetting all about the 6j sacks already 
deducted, he proceeds to deal with the 343^ sacks as follows. Taking Kadore first, he 
admits paying iioj sacks from his boat to the mayor Pwer^o, and adds that i sack was 
given as rations to another fisherman named Yetnufe (4, 3).'+ This yields, however, only 
II I j sacks, and now Dhutmose makes the blunder of thinking that he has only 2 sacks 
more to account for, whereas, Kadbre’s load being 123^ sacks, the amount to be ex- 
plained was actually 12. Overlooking this, he marks down 2 sacks as the unexplained 
remainder, assigns i J to the janitor Khensmose, and then, as an afterthought, attributes 
j to Nesamenope, doubtless his colleague as scribe of the Necropolis, while the 
poor fisherman Kadore gets only J sack. The three items (ij-rf + j) come as near to 
2 sacks as matters, but we see that Dhutmose has falsified his statement, since he had 
clearly forgotten one amount already accounted for and has misread one number as 
another ten less than it. With the freight of Dhutweshbi’s boat he deals in yet more 
cavalier fashion: he records having handed over 203! sacks to the mayor, and then 
states he has given 20 sacks to the skipper for expenses; and lastly he wrongly adds 

® Added below 1 . 3 before 1 . 5 was written. 

2 Both deities are often depicted upon the walls of the temple, see Porter Sc AIoss, Bibliography, vi, 1 13-17; 
the earliest mention of Xebtu (Nebu) appears to be on a Dyn. XVIII group of statues, in which the father of 
the principal person was a mayor of Esna, and the mother a female musician of Nebtu, see Rec. Trav. xiv, 
26-7, and again Borchardt, Statuen u. Statuetten, ii, no. 549. 

3 This good writing seems preseir ed only in the name of a queen of the early Eighteenth Dynasty, see 

Gauthier, Livre des rois, ii, 273. In pronunciation the t of the feminine was possibly not presenxd as in the older 
goddess’s name N€<j> 9 vs, ^ Allusion is made to this fisherman in one of Cemy’s letters ; see above, p. 30, n. 2. 



203! A 20 as 225, whereas he has previously told us that the boat of Dhutweshbi had 
taken on board a freight of only 220 sacks. 

These peccadilloes of Dhutmose are more amusing than instructive, our purpose 
being to elicit whatever information we can about the routine of land-taxation in 
Ramesside times. The doubt already expressed as to whether all the taxes referred to 
in this Turin papyrus emanated from Mato-lands of Pharaoh here reasserts itself in 
more insistent form, since the text explicitly attributes the assessment of 402 sacks of 
corn, not to such lands, but to the temple of Khnum and Nebu at Esna. Though the 
immediate aim of this article is to provide new material rather than to discuss the 
general problem, it would be wrong not to disclose the fact that the Wilbour papyrus 
affords at least a possibility of reconciling this assessment of a temple with an assess- 
ment of khato-hinds,. Throughout Text B of that papyrus, dealing exclusively with 
Mato-lands of Pharaoh, these are in every case said to be ‘on fields of’ some other land- 
owning entity. ‘On fields of Pharaoh’ is a common entiy% but much more commonly 
we find ‘on fields of’ such and such a god. The impression left is that among the 
estates belonging to a given temple some were segregated as Mafo-lands of Pharaoh, 
and these paid taxes to the Crown through the agency of officials or priests of high rank, 
the priests occasionally being those of the god on whose lands the Mafo-lands in 
question stood. If this is a true account of the facts, it might be immaterial whether a 
given assessment was attributed to a certain temple or to khato-hinds of Pharaoh. Here 
at Esna two temple-officials seem to be made primarily responsible for the payment, 
though under them and secondarily responsible were several ‘cultivators’ (ihwty), 
whom we may perhaps think of as obtaining the required amount partly from fields 
farmed by themselves, but partly from fields cultivated by smaller holders from whom 
they had to collect.' At all events it is clear that the taxes thus exacted were delivered 
at Thebes to exactly the same authorities as received the produce of khato-lands. 

4, 6 Received in Year 12, fourth month of the Winter season, day 5, from the hand of the scribe 
of the counting of the House of Amun Nesamun by the scribe of the Necropolis Dhutmose 
4, 7 and the janitor of the Mansion Dhutmose, spelt, sacks, barley^ 2J sacks. Details of it: ' the 
chief of the ergastulum Dhutemhab, 7 sacks; the brander (of cattle)^ Pkhal, if sacks, 
total 8 f sacks; the herdsman Mi'o, i| sacks; the cultivator Khensmose, f sack, total, 2j 
sacks ; total, corn, 10 f sacks. 

4, 8 Arrived and delivered to the female musician of Amun Hentowe [on] this day in the 
weigh-house ( ?) of the House of Maiu ( ?)+ by the scribe Dhutmose, lof sacks. 

4, 9 Received on this day in the town of Npiimu, from the hand of the herdsman of the Mansion 
Penhasi, 4 sacks; the chief of Medjoy-policemen, Nesamun, i sack; the fisherman Kharoy, 
4, 10 i| sacks; 1 the fisherman Pnakhtemtho if sacks. 

^ Note that the amount paid by the cultivator Sahtnufe (3, 12) is described as his smiu ‘harvest-tax’; for 
this word see above, pp. 20, 28-9. ^ Here Z™ it simply, not it-m-it. 

^ Lit. ‘carrier (or wielder) of the branding-instrument’. The title is not rare: in addition to the examples 
quoted in Wb. i, 6, 23 see P. Wilbour, A 37, i8. 

* A word is unknown and the rendering ‘weigh-house’ is a guess; the sign is uncertain. 

A similar word, hkewise obscure, P. Wilbour, 84, 9. Gunn suggests ' 3 °> 6; this is very 

possible, but there is certainly not room in the lacuna for mpi mht. Further, nothing seems known about the 
House of Maiu. I had read the last sign of Maiu as but Cemy takes it in conjunction with the previous 
ligature and prefers ^ | . 


4, II Received in the town of Imiotru from the hand of the scribe of the counting Nesamun from 

ploughing of the foreigner June, 12 sacks ; the foreigner Pkhal, if sacks, total, corn, Jj/ sacks. 

5, I Received in Year 12, first month of the Summer season, day 9, of the 12 sacks of spelt 
3, 2 fetched from the town of Imiotru from the ploughing of the foreigner lune, ' together with 

the if sacks' of the foreigner Pkhal, total, corn, Jjf sacks. The herdsman Penhasi, son of 
3, 3 Pkamen, in the town of Nimu, 4 sacks; ' the chief of Medjoy-policemen, Nesamun, i sack, 

TOTAL, 5 sacks. Received on this day by the female musician of Amun Hentowe on top^ of 

3, 4 the garner. ' Entered into the first magazine (‘The garner) overflows’, 12 sacks, 6 | sacks. 

Entered into the storeroom^ which is on top of ‘the Pure Land’,+ of corn, iS~ sacks. 

A large space both precedes and follows this section, marking it off as complete in 
itself, and this is confirmed by the fact that the receipts from the tax-payers and the 
deliveries to the authorities at Thebes balance one another. Nevertheless we are here 
confronted with a number of difficulties. In 3, 1-2 we found the scribe of the counting 
Nesamun delivering the corn of the House of Mont at Karnak, and though the same 
source is not mentioned in regard to the amounts received from him and set forth in 

4, 6-8 we can well believe that it was thence that they came. But what is to be made of 

the statement in 4, 1 1 that grain was received from this Nesamun in Gebelen, a state- 
ment confirmed by 5, 1-2? Did fields belonging to the House of Mont exist at 
Gebelen? Moreover, this Gebelen interlude is placed between and combined with 
taxes from anunknown^ town called 01 ® Npiimu in 4, 9 and 0 

in 5, 2. It is possible, but unprovable, that the element n found in the first spelling 
ought to have been placed before ®, in which case the name of the town would have 
meant ‘The Tents’; for imw somewhat similarly spelt see Wenamim i, 33. 47. 

The lines 4, 6-8 are self-contained and complete, and their figures which, as has 
been seen in a footnote (p. 27, n. i), provide conclusive testimony that amounts 
written in red refer to spelt {bdt) and amounts in black refer to barley (if or it-m-it), 
present no difficulties. The 8f sacks of spelt received from Nesamun are made up of 
amounts of 7 and if sacks respectively, and the barley received (2f sacks) is likewise 
made up of two amounts, namely if -r f sacks. The total of 8|^ + 2f=iof sacks is 
then recorded in 4, 9 as delivered in Thebes to the lady Hentowe. 

As already observed, the remaining lines of the section (4, 9-5, 4) are curiously 
arranged, and information is withheld from us which we should have been glad to have. 
One can hardly doubt that it was the scribe Dhutmose who delivered the grain to the 
lady Hentowe at Thebes, though his name is not mentioned; perhaps by this time 
he was tired of writing about himself. The previous sections were concerned only with 
a double operation, (i) receipts in provincial places and (2) delivery to the authorities 
in Thebes. Here the operation is tripartite: (i) receipts in the provinces (4, 9-1 1); (2) 
receipt in Thebes presumably by Dhutmose (5, 1-3); and (3) receipt — the word sp 
here exceptionally takes the place of iw swd ‘arrived and delivered’ — at Thebes by 

* Here the words ^f(-| ; begin with the feminine article, though fl- hfr is a masculine word. In an un^ 
published article Cemy has plausibly suggested that though what is written is ‘the if sacks’, what was read 
was ‘the 6 oipe\ the word /pt ome being feminine. 

2 Here we have (hr}) did} w, probably oi‘2iu, whereas in 2, 5 tp-hzvt ‘roof w^as used. 

3 For sf'yt see above, p. 24, n. 2. ^ Obscure; the sign Q is not quite certain. 

5 The place is not mentioned in Gauthier’s dictionary. 



Hentowe (5, 3); and strangest point of all, what is the final part of every operation 
recorded in the papyrus, namely the entering of the corn into the granary, here (5, 4) is 
duplicated, the same grain (12 sacks of spelt and 6f of barley, a total of i8f sacks) being 
stated to have been stored in two different places! Was this corn transferred from one 
granary to another ? W e are not told. Strange are the ways of Egyptian book-keeping! 

If, as seems likely, Dhutmose was staying at home at this moment — the word J ''(j 
‘fetched’ in 5, i seems significant — who was it that collected the taxes at N(pi)imu and 
Gebelen? Not the scribe Nesamun, unless the expression ‘from the hand of’ ( 1 :-^^) 
in 4, II is a mistake for ‘by’ (J„). Hitherto we have found that the smaller amounts 
taken in a provincial town from specified cultivators and others were first collected by 
some higher local functionary or functionaries (e.g. the scribe Nesamun in 3, 2) and 
by him or them passed on to the tax-collector from the Capital. In N(pi)imu no such 
mediating authoritv is named. The corn sent from N(pi)imu consisted of four amounts, 
three of barley (4 — i A if sacks in black) and one of spelt (if sacks in red). The two 
items of if sacks each said to have come from fishermen disappear completely here- 
after. Were they returned to them as payment for transport ? In the statement of the 
receipt of the grain at Thebes (5, 1-3) the amounts received at Gebelen are dealt with 
first; they were 12 sacks of spelt and if of barley, totalling 13! sacks. Then the 
4—1 = 5 sacks of barley from N(pi)imu are noted, the two amounts from the fisher- 
men being omitted, as aforesaid. In the first statement with regard to the binning 
away (5, 4), the spelt (12 sacks) and the barley (5 + if = 6f sacks) are sorted out 
afresh, and it is only in the second statement (see above) that we are explicitly informed 
of the net amount (i8f sacks) received from the two towns. 

5, 5 Received in Year 12, fourth month of the Winter season, day 13, ^ from the hands of the 
two janitors, of the corn of the store of Pharaoh which is on the account of the scribe of the 
5, 6 counting of the House of Amun Nesamun, 4 and 20 sacks. ' total come from him of the 72 
sacks of corn, 55^^ sacks. Deficit, i 6 j sacks. 

5, 7 Received in Year 12, fourth month of the Winter season, day 13, from the hand of the scribe 

5, 8 Sahtnufe of the corn of the foreigner Eroy,- 20 sacks. Details of it: the deficit of ^ grain of 

the House of Suchus, lord of Imiotru, lof sacks; grain of the store of Pharaoh which is on 
the account of Nesamun the scribe of the counting belonging to the House of Amen-Re', King 
S, 9 of the Gods, 8 sacks; what the prophet of Suchus paid in excess, ^ if sacks, tot.vl, 20 sacks. 

S, 10 Received . . . + from the scribe of the counting of the House of Amun Nesamun of corn of 

the store of Pharaoh from the hand of. . . . 

5, II Received [from the scribe of the counting] of the House of Amun Nesamun. Given to the 
priest of Alut, 3 sacks . . . total ( ?). . . . 

This final section of the recto, perhaps the conclusion of the entire document, is 
obscured by the lacunae in its last two lines. It is even more perplexing than the 
previous sections, but at least we can see that all the lines are concerned (5, 7-9 perhaps 
only in part) with the obligations of the scribe of the counting Nesamun. We glean from 
5, 6 that he had to collect 72 sacks of grain due to Pharaoh; the facts that he was made 

^ Or 12 ; the figure is not quite clear. ^ For this man see below, pp. 35-6. 

3 Lit., ‘what is (in) excess of the prophet’ etc. 

A small lacuna followed by a blank. Perhaps a date had been intended. 



responsible as an individual and that the expression ‘store (f of Pharaoh’ 

is used seem to point to this liability being in respect of A/w^o-lands of Pharaoh. It is 
learnt that Nesamun had already delivered 55! sacks, this including the 20 sacks of 
spelt and 4 of barley received on the twelfth or thirteenth day of the month. It seems 
impossible to discover the 55I — 24 = 3if sacks in the amounts which the papyrus had 
earlier recorded as coming from him. In 3, 1-2 there were 6 sacks, but these were a 
payment from the temple of IMont and possibly not connected with his own assessment 
in respect of khato-lands. Of the i8f sacks mentioned in 5, 3-4 as delivered, only the 
13} received at Gebelen are explicitly stated to have come through Nesamun. And 
even if we were to accept these 6+ i8f sacks as part of the 72 sacks which he had to pay, 
still they together amount to only 24!, not to the 3 1 2 which he is stated to have alreadv 
paid. Of the 72 — 55! = i6| sacks still outstanding on day 13, perhaps 8 were for- 
warded from Gebelen by the scribe Sahtnufe (see above 2, 2) simultaneouslv with two 
amounts emanating from other sources; possibly the other 8^ sacks were accounted 
for in the two damaged lines which conclude the document. Of the two amounts sent 
from Gebelen together with that for which Nesamun was liable, this again described 
as ‘of the store of Pharaoh’, one was lof sacks still unpaid from the assessment of the 
temple of Suchus, and the other was an amount of if sacks from a prophet of Suchus, 
probably the Pheni named in 2, 2-3 as responsible for returns from khato-lands of 
Pharaoh. The if sacks now paid by him are said to be ‘in excess’, i.e. probably in 
excess of what he was called upon to pay. This recalls the fact that on the Bilgai stela 
{ZAS L, 51-2) a high official boasts of having paid taxes very largely in excess of what 
had been demanded of him.^ 

The verso of the same papyrus, perhaps likewise written by the scribe Dhutmose 
himself, but in a larger hand, enumerates payments of a similar nature m.ade in year 14, 
more than a year later. The text is less interesting, but for the sake of completeness 
I translate the whole, adding comments where needed. 

vs. I, I Year 14, first month of the Inundation season, day 10, received from the hand of the 
prophet of Hathor Nesamun. Spelt, jo sacks. Details of it: 

The foreigner Pkamen 5/ sacks 

The foreigner Marrui 4 sacks 

The foreigner Penthores 6f sacks 

vs. I, 53 The foreigner Pkamen, son of Pwa'amun, ■ 2 {:){ sack 
The foreigner Pendhowt / sack 

The foreigner Nesamun sacks 

The foreigner Eroy j;’ sacks 

The foreigner Yugaben j sacks 

V'S. I, 10 Received from the prophet !(?)sack 

Total JO 

‘ U 4 i. I, 221, 3 has ‘Betrag’ as the meaning oirfrio. The word needs investigation: ‘amount’ is doubtless 
sometimes an adequate rendering, but Crum gives the meaning of Coptic evoo as ‘thesaurus', ‘store’. 

^ On this stela the numbers are astonishing. The fortress-commander claims to have paid double his 
assessment, which was 70,000 sacks, i.e. about 140,000 bushels or the total produce of nearly 5,200 acres. 

3 Here traces of the word for Pharaoh, from the end of a line of a previous column. 



The Hathor mentioned here is unlikely to have been the goddess of ^Agni mentioned 
above, p. 25, n. 6, partly because the foreigner Eroy in vs. 1,8 is doubtless identical 
with the man named in rt. 5, 7 as belonging to Gebelen, while Pkamen and Penthores 
occur again below in connexion with that town (vs. 2, 9. 10), and partly because the 
epithet ‘lady of ‘Agni’ would then be urgently needed. Hathor was worshipped at or 
near Gebelen at the town of Pi-Hathor (Pathyris) and also with the name of 
var. ‘Lady of the two egg-shells’, see Kees, ZAS Lxxi, 151. The items as given 

above add up only to 29! sacks, but one or two of the numbers are damaged or difficult 
to see, and perhaps the total given by the ancient scribe may be correct after all. 

Received in Year 14, first month of the Inundation season, day 1 1, in the town of Smen. 

The- foreigner Penernute 

2f sacks 

The foreigner ^Anefsu 

10 sacks 

The foreigner E^howtenufe 

7I sacks 

The foreigner Penhasi 

4 sacks 


24 sacks 

This brief paragraph is marked off from what precedes and w'hat follows by a 
curved line running below and to right of it; the same procedure is found in various 
Late-Ramesside papyri, e.g. P. Wilbour, pis. 40. 57; P. Chester Beatty IV, pi. 15 a. 
The town of Smn is that originally written and the like; it is elaborately 

discussed by Kuentz in Bull. xxviii, 123-54. In the Golenischeff Onomasticon 
Imiotru intervenes between it and Armant, and for that reason it can hardly be located 
at Rizeikat where Gauthier {Diet, geogr. v, 17) still places it, that village being only 4 
miles to the south-west of Armant. As Kuentz^ and Kees (ZAS lxxi, 151), as well as 
others, have seen, it is probably the ancient Crocodilopolis, the twin-city of Pathyris 
at Gebelen. 

vs. 2 , 7 Received in the town of Imiotru 

A= The foreigner Kha'emtir, 7 (-[- ?) sacks 
A The foreigner Pkamen, 2 sacks 

' From here onwards the text is unpublished. 

^ Here the items are on the level of the first word of the heading, not inset as in col. i . 

^ His statement (op. cit., 153) is obscure. He seems to identify Swmnzv at once with Rizeikat and with 
Gebelen, though these must be some fourteen miles distant from one another. 

■* The writing of the town-name deserves some comment. In the recto (2, 6. 12; 4, ii ; 5, i) 

the spelling is the same, but in 5, 8 we find the variant (] ^ @ the Golenischeff Onomasticon (4, 14—5) 

has ™ g; . The pronunciation Imiotru, or rather Imiatru, is probably correct for the Middle Kingdom, 

the etymology being clearly seen in the writing ’Iw-m-itrw ‘Island in the River’ — variants see 

Gauthier, op. cit., l, 42-3; ZAS lxxi, 151. The initial doubtless represents the older izv, as it does in 
group-writing for {, but it seems quite possible that the value mi or m found in Molpis also played a 

part and enabled the essential m to be omitted in the Ramesside spellings. In view of the well-known con- 
servatism of proper names, it might be in theorv’ possible that the pronunciation Imiotru survived on through- 
out the New Kingdom, although in the word for ‘river’ the spelling the Hebrew and the Coptic 

eioop are plain evidence that the t was early lost. However, Demotic indicates the pronunciation Amur for 
the place-name, see Griffith, Rylands Papyri^ iii, 421 ; Rec. Trav, xxxiii, 128. 

5 I use A to represent A written later in the margin and meaning A(rrived). In I, ii the same sign has 
possibly been written and then erased. 

THE a:miens papyrus 



vs. 2, 10 A The foreigner Penth 5 res, 3 sacks 

The foreigner Phonamennakhte, 4 sacks 
A The foreigner Katja, sacks 
A The foreigner 'Autiroy, 3 [sacks] 

The foreigner Sebks^ankh [son of? . . .], i (?)| [sacks] 
vs. 2, 15 A [The foreigner E'ho\vte[nufe?, x sacks] 

Two of the men mentioned occurred in vs. col. i, see above. No total is given here or 
in col. 3. It is significant that the number in vs. 2, 9 is given in black, and this can only 
mean, in accordance with my previous demonstration, that the payments were in bdt 
‘spelt’, except in this one instance, where the payment was in it-m-it ‘barley’. 

vs. 3, 1 First month of the Inundation season, day 25. On this day, received, (in) the House of 
vs. 3, 2 Khnum and Nebu at Esna, ' from the hand of the temple-scribe Penhasi, corn, 80 sacks, 
vs. 3, 3 Second month of the Inundation season, day 7. On this day received from the hand of 
the temple-scribe Penhasi, 70 sacks. Total, Z50. 

vs. 3, 4 Second month of the Inundation season, day. ... On this day, received from the 
hand of the prophet of Amun P'ankha', 10 sacks. 

For the gods and temple of Esna, as well as for the temple-scribe Penhasi, see above, 
pp. 30-1 . The prophet P^ankha^ is a new acquaintance. Here the texts of the verso come 
to an end. 

§ 3. The Amiens papyrus 

I pass on to the most important document which we possess with regard to the 
transport of corn, namely a papyrus at Amiens recently published for the first time in 
my Ramesside Administrative Documents, pp. 1-13. In the Introductory Note to that 
fascicule I have acknowledged my indebtedness to Peet, who was preparing an edition 
at the time of his death; also to two French colleagues and friends who helpfully 
arranged for the loaning of the manuscript to the Louvre there to be re-mounted under 
my supervision by Dr. Ibscher. Here our business is solely with the contents, and I can 
curtail my description of external features. It is a manuscript about 2I metres in length, 
inscribed on both sides in a highly cursive Late-Ramesside hand, a sample of which is 
shown on pi. VI I. Both recto and verso were written by the same scribe and treat of the 
same topic. None the less the text is not continuous, since the verso starts at the same 
end as the recto', had it been continuous, the scribe, on reaching the inner margin, 
would have turned his roll horizontally and have proceeded boustrophedon. One or 
more pages are lost at the beginning of both recto and verso. Still more regrettable is 
the loss of about half the height throughout. The usual height of large business papyri 
at this period was 37-42 cm.; of that amount only 17 or 18 cm. still remain, the 
bottoms of pages being lost on the recto, and the tops on the verso. 

For reasons that will emerge later I translate the whole of the recto before proceeding 
to the commentary. 

One or more pages are lost at the beginning. 

I, I Ship of ‘Ashafeyew, son of - Bekenkhons, of the House of Amun,' under his authority; 

I, 2 Given to him in the Island of Amun Ever\--Iand-comes-for-the-love[-of-him, on] the 

> The phrase ‘of the House of Amun’ probably belongs both to the ship and to the ship’s captain. So also 
several times below. 



threshing-floor of the chief workman Phamnute, being corn of domain of the House of Amun 
^Ashafe, lOO sacks. 

I, 3 Given to him in this place on this threshing-floor, being corn of domain of the House of . . 

in the Granary of the House of Amun, under his authorit)'’, JO sacks. 

I, 4 Given to him in this place on this threshing-floor, being corn of domain of [the House of] 
Ra^messe-miamun in the House of Amun of He-e-pwoid, under his authority, 154} sacks. 
Balance, ^4 sacks. Nesamun, 100 sacks. 

1 , 5 Given [to him] on the river-bank of Dja<-khe, being corn of this domain, under his authority ; 

which had been in the ship of Seti, [son of] Psekhemne, 20 sacks. 

I, 6 [Given to him [in ?] . . . inP . . ., [being] corn of [this] domain, by the hand of the controller 
Amen . . . , 321^ sacks. 

I, 7 [Given to him in] the [new] island [we]st of Khenu (?), [on] the threshing-floor of the 
prophet of the House of JMehye-weben [Hori]^, being corn of the House of Amen-ReS King 
of the Gods, which Pharaoh newly founded, under his authority, 100 sacks. 

I, 8 [Total] . , . this [pl]ace (??)p [321]^ 424 [sacks]. Rations of his crew, . 9 sacks. 

I, 9 [Ship of the] ... of the House of Amun Setmose, under his authority: 

I, 10 [Given to him in the Island of Amun] Ever\^-land-comes-[for-the-] love-of-[him, on the 
threshing-floor of ... , being corn of domain of] the House of {Ra^mes'se-miamun of 
He-e-pwoid, 142 sacks. 

I, II [Given to him in this place on] the threshing-floor of the priest K[eson/ being corn of 
domain of] ... , 228 sacks. Balance, 28- sacks. [Domain] of Khen-iMin: i99ji sacks. 

1, 12 [Given to him in this place on the threshing-]floor of . . . y4j [sacks]. 

Some twelve or move lines are lost at the bottom of the page. 

2, I Given to him in the Island of Amun He-seizes-ever}^-land, on the threshing-floor of the 

controller ^Anere,® being corn oT the House of Amun, domain of Khen-Min, under his 
authority, 50 sacks. 

2, 2 Given to him in the Island of Amun Filler-of-granaries, on the threshing-floor of the scribe 
Pmerit,^o being corn of domain of theHouse of Ra^messe-miamun of He- e, -pwoid, i2| sacks.^ 
2, 3 Total, given to him, laf 840 sacks. Rations of his crew, 59 sacks. 

2, 4 Ship of the commander of ships Mins^ankh, son of Bekamun, of the House of Amun, under 

his authority: 

^ There is not room for [Amun Ashafe] as in 5, 9. None the less that temple must be meant; perhaps the 
epithet Ashafe alone was written. 

- Part of a place-name. ^ In black ; so always with numbers not printed in italics. 

This line is undoubtedly to be restored in accordance with 4, 7, Aly published text is incorrect. After 
‘island of’ part of the tail of ^ is visible ; in the name traces of the tail of can still be seen ; the ([ must, 
as often, have been written above; for read ^Jj 0 I however, unable to reconcile the 

varying writings of the geographical name after ‘west of’. 

5 Such a phrase in the total is quite abnormal ; the restoration is, therefore, doubtful. 

^ Restored from i, 6. The black number, referring to ‘barley’, stands before the red ijbdt ‘spelt’) in 

the totals 2, 3. 9 ; 3, 3. 12 ; 4, 3, as also in the summary 5, 2. 3. 5. 

’ Restored from 2, 5. Howev'er, the threshing-floor mentioned there was in a different place; perhaps this 
priest owned two. 

* The same man at the same place, below 2, 8 ; he is mentioned also in 3, 10. 

^ Note the absence of the word rmnyt before the name of the temple here and again in 2, 8; the reason is 
its presence before ‘Khen-Min’, which suflices to show that the reference is to provincial propert\^ of the 
temple. However, rmnyt is found both before and after the name of the temple in 3, 10. 

The same owner of a threshing-floor at the same place below 2, 7; 3, ii. The pronunciation of the name 
is doubtful ; in 3, 1 1 it is written p/-wmT, wTich is unknown to Ranke. My suggestion Pmerit ‘the beloved’ is at 
least intelligible. 


2, 5 Given to him in the Island of Amun Overrunning^ -his-boundary, on the threshing-floor 
of the priest Keson, being corn of domain of the House of Ra^messe-miamun of He-e-pwoid, 
under his authority, 600 sacks. Balance, jjj. Domain of Tjebu, jjj j sacks. 

2, 6 Given to him in this place on this threshing-floor, being corn of domain of the House of 
Seti-merenptah in the House of x\mun, under his authority, J sacks. 

2, 7 Given to him in the Island of Amun Filler-of-granaries, on the threshing-floor of the scribe 
Pmerit, being corn of domain of the House of Ra^messe-miamun of He-\e)-p\void, 10 sacks. 

2, 8 Given to him in the Island of Amun He-seizes-every-land, on the threshing-floor of the 
controller ^Anere, being corn of the House of Amun, domain of Khen-AIin, by the hand of 
the controller Anere, 100 sacks. 

2, 9 Total given to him, 10 700 sacks. Rations of his crew, 6j sacks. 

2, 10 Ship of the commander of ships Wennofrenakhte, son of Ashafenakhte, of [this] house, 

under his authority : 

2, II Given to him in the Island of Amun [Overrunning]-his-boundary, on the threshing-floor of 

the priest [Keson],- being corn of domain of the House of Rafmesse-mi[amun] . . . 600 sacks. 

Balance, 1^0 sacks. House of [Sethos], 460^ [sacks]. 

Some tzceke or more lines are lost at the bottom of the page, 

3, I Given to him in the Island of Amun Spirit-in-Thebes, on the threshing-floor of the 

cultivator Ashafehervxb,^ being corn of this domain, sacks. 

3, 2 Given to him,^ being corn of domain of the House of Amen-ReS King of the Gods, which 
Pharaoh newly founded, under the authority of the Steward; which had been in the ship of 
Seti, son of Psekhemne, 52 J 145} sacks. Balance, 45 130 sacks. 

3,3 Total, given to him, 50 930^--^ sacks. Balance, 45 920^- sacks. Rations of his crew, 
40 j sacks. 

3, 4 Ship of the captain Ashafemhab, son of Neferronpe, of the House of Amun, under his 
authority : 

3, 5 Given to him in the new island west of Inmut, on the threshing-floor of the controller 
Pentwere, being corn of domain of the House of Ra^messe-miamun of He-e-pwoid, under 
his authority, 260 sacks. Balance, 84^ sacks. The domain of Pharaoh, sacks. 

3, 6 Given to him in this place, on the threshing-floor of the cultivator Peierov, son of Amen- 
himam, being corn of this domain 100 ^- sacks, 

3, 7 Given to him in this place, on the threshing-floor of the controller Phesy, son of Pentwere, 
being corn of domain which Pharaoh newly founded, under his authority, 328^ sacks. Balance, 
128- sacks. Domain of Khen-AIin, 200 sacks. 

3, 8 Given to him in the Island of Amun Spirit-in-Thebes, on the threshing-floor of the 
cultivator Ashafeheiyxb, being corn of domain of the House of Ra^messe-miamun of He-e- 
pwoid, under his authority, no sacks. 

3, 9 Given to him on the river-bank of Djaf-ruhe, being corn of this ( ?) domain ; which had been 
in the ship of Seti, son of Psekhemne, 5 sacks. 

3, 10 Given to him in the island east of Dja^-ruhe, on the threshing-floor of the cultivator 
Wennofre, being corn of domain of the House of Amun, domain of Khen-Min, by the hand 
of the controller Anere, 100 sacks. 

1 The transitive use ‘run beyond', ‘overrun' does not appear to be known elsewhere, see Wh. iii, 473, 11-15. 

For this place see below, p. 45, n. 4. 

2 Restored from 2, 5 above. 

3 There is insufficient room to restore ‘of He-e-pwoid' as in 2, 5. 

^ My edition gives 360, but the number is half destroyed, and 600—140 = 460 is clearly required. 

5 The same man in the same place, below 3,8. ^ Here ‘ in this place ' has possibly been omitted. 


3, II 

3, 12 
3, 13 

3, 14 

3, 15 

4, I 

4 , 2 

4» 3 
4, 4 
4, 5 


4, 7 

4, 9 
4, lO 

4, II 

4 , 12 

5, I 
5 > 2 


Given to him in the Island of Amun Filler-of-Granaries, on the threshing-floor of the 
scribe Pmerit, being com of domain of the House of Ra^messe-miamun of He-e-pwoid, under 
his authority, lo sacks. 

Total, given to him, lo sacks. Rations of his crew, 42 sacks. 

Ship of the captain Khensemhab, son of Neb^an, of the House of Amen-Re^ King of the 
Gods, under the authority of the Steward of Amun : 

Given to him on the river-bank of . . on the threshing-floor of the controller [Pennes]towe, 
being com of regular domain of the House of Amun, under his authority in the regioni of 
Tjebu, 40J 70 sacks. 

^(+ . . .) sacks. Balance, 31I 79 (+ ?). 

Some twelve or more lines are lost at the bottom of the page. 

Given to him in the Byre of Pkal, on the threshing-floor of the cultivator Pentwere, being 
com of (this )2 domain, under his authority, lO sacks. 

Given to him,^ being com of domain of the House of Ra^messe-miamun of He-e-pwoid; 
which had been in the ship of the captain Seti, son of Psekhemne, 28 sacks. Balance, 24,^ 

Total, given to him, 28 310 sacks. Balance, 24 310. Rations of his crew, 31 sacks. 

Ship of the captain Psmennakhte, son of ^Ashafenakhte, of this house, under his authority: 

Given to him in the Village of Medjed, on the threshing-floor of the retainer Amenhotpe, 
being corn of domain of the House of Amun, (founded) for ( ?) the people who were brought 
on account of their crimes, 95- sacks. 

Given to him in the Island of Amun His^-Spirit-is-in-Thebes, on the threshing-floor of the 
controller Ashafeheryeb, being corn of (this) domain, under his authority, 135 sacks. 

Given to him in the new island on the west of Khenemti, on the threshing-floor of the 
prophet of the House of IMehye-weben^ H 5 ri, being corn of domain which Pharaoh newly 
founded, 30 sacks. 

Total given to him, 300} sacks. Rations of his crew, 38 sacks. 

Ship of Neb^an, son of Hadnakhtu, of this house, under his authority: 

Given to him in the ^a^e-land^ of He-nute, on the threshing-floor of the controller 
Sethiwenmaf, being corn of domain of the House of Ra<messe-miamun (founded) for ( P)^ 
the people of the Sherden, 200 sacks. Domain which Pharaoh founded, 32 sacks. 

Given to him in [this place, on] this threshing-floor, being corn of domain of the House of 
Amun which Pharaoh newly founded, i'j3 sacks. 

[Given to him] ... [of com of domain of the House of Amun (founded) for the people who 
were brought on account of] their crimes, yi^x sacks. 

Some twelve or more lines are lost at the bottom of the page. 

Total, this expedition, 21 barges, making 

Com of domain of the House of Amen-Re^ King of the Gods, which Pharaoh newly 

^ Cf. vs. 2 , x-r6. 

^ The same omission, and accompanied by the same peculiar tick, in 4, 6. 

3 The place where the corn was given is here curiously omitted. 

^ Both numbers here are probably written in red by mistake, since in the total (4, 3) they appear in black. 

5 The possessive ‘his* in this place-name only here. 

^ On this reading, not recognized in my edition, see p. 38, n. 4, and for the place, see p. 48. 

7 The exact meaning of this term, common in the Wilbour papyrus, is unknown. 

® Here, ought doubtless to have been read in place of > see the notes on 5, 3. 4 in my edition. 

5 The number of sacks carried has been left for later insertion. 


founded, under the authority of the Steward Ra^messenakhte lool I sacks. Total, 

2271I. Balance, 100^ 

5, 3 Corn of domain of the House of Amen-Re^ Ririg of the Gods, which King Usima^re^- 
miamun founded for ( ?) the people who were brought on account of their crimes, under his 
authority, 40 8g^ sacks, total, 935. 

5, 4 Corn of domain of the House of Amen-Re^ King of the Gods, which King Usima^^re^- 
miamun founded for ( ?) the people of the Sherden and for the Royal scribes of the army, under 
his authority, 8^0 sacks. 

5, 5 Corn of domain of the House of Ra^messe-miamun in the House of Amun of He-e-pwoid, 
under his authority, 22o| 5432 jj sacks. Total, 5653^. Rations, 920 sacks, 

5, 6 Corn of domain of the House of Ra^messe-Hek-On, Maker of New Land (?),^ under his 
authority, zoo sacks. 

5, 7 Corn of domain of the House of Setnakhte-merer-Amun in the House of Amun, under his 
authority, 522 J | sacks. 

5, 8 Corn of domain of the House of Seti-merenptah, in the House of Amun, under his authority, 
340 sacks. 

5, 9 Corn of domain of the House of Amun Ashafe in the Granary of the House of Amun, 
under his authority, 830 sacks. 

5, 10 Corn of domain of the House of Nofretiri- in this house, under his authority 200 sacks. 

5, II Corn of domain of the House of Ahhotpe, [under] his authority 200 sacks. 

Some lines may be lost at the bottom of this, the last line of the recto. 

Between page 5 of the recto and the inner margin of the papyrus there is a blank 
space of 18 cm., and this fact, coupled with the contents, shows that but for the serious 
losses at the bottom of the pages, the recto would be a document complete in itself. 
The final page reveals its nature. Its first line (5, i) mentions a flotilla of 21 ships all 
engaged in a single expedition, and the rest of the page sums up, under the heads of 
various religious foundations, the amounts of corn accruing to them from certain 
provincial estates. Since, as set forth in the first four pages, each individual ship carried 
corn belonging to several of the foundations, it seems likely that all the ships were 
bound for Thebes. We may perhaps imagine the cargoes as delivered en masse to the 
granary of Amen-Re^ at Karnak, thence to be distributed on demand to the various 
sanctuaries that had a claim on the corn.^ This view implies that all the temples or 
chapels named were at Thebes. Perhaps all of them except the House of Amun 
Ashafe were in Karnak itself, since the funerary temples on the West bank were 
regularly described as ‘Mansion’, not by the word c-it ‘House’. + 

All lines of recto, p. 5, except the first, begin with the words it n rmnyt ‘Corn 

of domain of . . .’, to which the name of the particular religious foundation is appended. 

* See below, pp. 43-4> and my revised reading of vs. 4, x — 9. Whether is really to be rendered ‘New Land’, 

or whether the expression is for Ir rn mnct ‘who makes anew’ is uncertain, the determinative n ■ being constantly, 
though erroneously, used for mnct ‘new thing’, ‘newness’ at this period, e.g. in this very papyrus, 3,2. 

- The latter part of the name consists merely of dashes, but Queen hVhmose-Nofretiri must surely be meant. 
So too in a place-name Ile-Nofretiri of P. Wilboiir, Text B, mostly showing the cartouche-end {e.g. 24, 22), 
but once (14, 4) omitting it. 

^ Some support is given to this hypothesis by the Griffith fragments described below, pp. 64-70. 

^ See Porter .S: Moss, Topographical Bibliography, ii, Index, for buildings at Karnak of Sethos I, Ramesses II, 
and Ramesses III; possibly also of Ahmose-Nofretiri. None such, however, are known of Ahhotpe or of 




That name is followed, except in 1 . 2, by the phrase — ‘under his authority’, and 
1 . 2 shows the pronoun to refer to the Steward Ra^messenakhte — the expression for 
‘steward’ is ^n', literally ‘house-overseer’, closely corresponding to the Greek 
olKOVOflO^, The phrase ‘under the authority of the Steward Ra<:messenakhte’ or ‘under 
his authority’ can hardly refer to the temple or chapel itself, since this will have stood 
under the control of its own priesthood, and ultimately under that of the High-priest of 
Amen-Re' at Karnak. It seems clear that the phrase must qualify the word Lfvw 
‘domain’: not the temples, but the fields belonging to them, were subject to the 
authority of the Steward. This word in more uncial hieratic written as 

rmnyt, was exceedingly rare when first deciphered by me in the Wilbour papyrus, where 
it occurs very often. Since then it has emerged, not only in almost every line of the 
Amiens papyrus, but also in the Griffith fragments to be described below in § 8. Full 
discussion must await my commentary on the Wilbour papyrus. Suffice it to say here 
that rmnyt evidently signifies those lands which, even if widely separated from one 
another and from their owners, belonged to some landlord institution mentioned in a 
following genitive. ‘Domain’ seems a suitable rendering. In the Wilbour papyrus the 
genitive is sometimes followed by ‘under the authority of . . .’in order to indicate 
the official under whom lay the administration of the ‘domain’ ; at other times, when an 
inferior official is to be named, ‘by the hand of’, ‘through’, is substituted. When 

the genitive is the name of a town, as in the two expressions of the Amiens papyrus 
‘domain of Khen-Min’, ‘domain of Tjebu’, this apparently means that those towns, 
which were centres of provincial administration (capitals of nomes), were somehow 
concerned with the management of the estates in question or with the collection of the 
corn expected from them. ‘Domain of Pharaoh’ will turn out to be an abbreviation. 
Lastly, it must be mentioned that one and the same temple may have many different 
‘domains’,^ each distinguished from the other, not by the locality in which it lay, but 
by the different functionary responsible for its management. 

All the temple-lands referred to in the summary thus stood under the authority of 
the ‘Steward Ra^messenakhte’ (5, 2), elsewhere (3, 2; also vs. 2, x-l-9; 4, x-f 2. 4. 7; 
5, x + 4) designated simply as ‘the Steward’ and once (rt. 3, 13) as ‘the Steward of 
Amun’.- The presence of the definite article and the omission of the name in the two 
latter variants are sure signs that he was an official of the highest rank, and the promi- 
nence given to the Steward Usimafre'nakhte in the Wilbour papyrus, where likewise 
the variant ‘the Steward of Amun’ is sometimes found, confirms the impression that 
in him we have one whose place in the administration of the vast estate of the Theban 
god was second only to that of the High-priest himself. Throughout the recto of the 
Amiens papyrus it is always the Steward Ra'messenakhte to whom the words ‘under his 
authority’ refer, and it is evident that the ships, no less than the arable land, were under 
his supervision. He must have been mentioned near the beginning of the document, 
perhaps after the opening protocol giving the date, reign, and heading at the beginning 

^ For this reason I at first rendered the word as ‘department’, e.g. ‘department of this house under the 
authority of X’, but further study made it clear that rmnyt is a collective term for fields in different parts united 
by the common bond of belonging to the same institution and under the administrative control of the same official. 

2 ‘Amun’ is here, as in the title of the First prophet, short for ‘Amen-Re^, King of the Gods’. 


of the lost first page. I have sought in vain elsewhere for references to this particular 
Steward, the namesake of the High-priest under Ramesses V, of an ‘overseer of hunters’ 
mentioned below in vs. 2, x + 5, and again of a ‘Royal scribe, overseer of granaries’ 
mentioned in vs. 4, x-j-9. As noted above, the holder of the office of Steward of Amun 
in the Wilbour papyrus was Usima^re^nakhte, and that document has also a rather 
mysterious reference (A, 80, 9) to a steward named Peel, who may conceivably have 
been Usima^recnakhte’s predecessor. The Wilbour papyrus is dated to the reign of 
Ramesses V, and since the Amiens papyrus is known to be later than Ramesses III, 
there seems but little room for Ra^messenakhte in the interval. 

There is, moreover, a good reason for not placing Ra'messenakhte, and with him the 
writing of the Amiens papyrus, in the reign of Ramesses IV. From vs. 2, x + 8. 9 it 
seems to follow that the document dates from a king whose day of accession lay between 
the 29th day of the seventh, and the 7th day of the ninth month, and that king can have 
been neither Ramesses IV (ZAS Lxxii, 109) nor Ramesses IX (JEA xxii, 177). I am 
inclined to assign it to one of the ephemeral successors of Ramesses V. Other prominent 
officials of the period are mentioned on the verso, but none of them is known from outside 
sources. That the Amiens papyrus is posterior to Ramesses III is evident from two 
foundations the names of which {e.g. rt. 5, 3. 4) embody his, prenomen, and from a third 
(rt. 5, 6) the name of which contains his nomen ', while the term ‘Pharaoh’, customarily 
used at this period of the still living king, is found in the name of a foundation men- 
tioned just before, see rt. 5, 2. At this point there comes into view an interesting 
phenomenon common both to the Wilbour and the Amiens papyrus: temples in one 
of the great capitals are enumerated chronologically backwards, starting with the king 
under whom the document was written. In the summary of recto, p. 5 of the Amiens 
papyrus the first foundation mentioned (5, 2) is an addition made by ‘Pharaoh’ to the 
estates of the great temple of Amen-Re< at Karnak; then follow in order two similar 
additions by Ramesses III (5, 3-4), then after one exception to be discussed below 
(5, 5) successively foundations by Ramesses III (5, 6), Setnakhte (5, 7), Sethos I (5, 8), 
an anonymous one (5, 9, see below), and lastly two by the Queens Nofretiri (5, 10) and 
^Ahhotpe (5, 1 1) respectively. 

All these foundations, except the two oldest from the beginning of the Eighteenth 
Dynasty and a third bearing the odd name ‘House of Ra^messe-Ruler-of-Heliopolis 
(f.e. Ramesses HI) Maker of New Land (?)(5,6)’, are said to be ‘in the House of Amun’, ^ 
confirming the conjecture, based on the logic of the situation, that all of them were at 

* Sethe, Urgeschichtey p. 4, makes the interesting observ^ation that the Greek names of cities like Diospolis, 
Hermupolis, Heliopolis, etc. are translations of the old Egyptian designations with ^ ‘House of , . He does 
not give as examples ‘House of Amun’ and ‘House of Re^’ but I suppose he would have considered both 
as such. I doubt if the Egyptians would have added these epithets to names of temples unless they regarded 
them as actually within the Theban or Heliopolitan territor>L The only dubious cases known to me are 
the places called (i) ‘Those of the Mansion of Ra^messe-Ruler-of-Heliopolis in-the-House-of-Re<, north 
of Heliopolis’, the later Natho and the modem Tell el-Yahudlyah, and this can quite plausibly be interpreted 
to mean colonists from the temple of Ramesses III in Heliopolis living farther north; (2) a Memphite 
temple mentioned in the Wilbour papyrus and called ‘House of Ra^messe-miamun, Repeater of festivals 
in the House of Re«’, where again ‘in the House of Re«’ may qualify the epithet ‘Repeater’, etc,, and not the 
word ‘House’. 



Thebes. Some doubt might arise, however, with regard to the exceptionally placed 
foundation mentioned above. This (5, 5) incorporates the nomen of Ramesses II, and 
unlike any of the other foundations mentioned, is followed by the name of a town 
He-e-pwoid which must be presumed to have been somewhere in the provinces. The 
full description of the fields owned by the foundation is ‘domain of the House of 
Ra^messe-miamun in the House of Amun of He-e-pwoid’ (5, 5; also i, 4), but elsewhere 
‘in the House of Amun’ is omitted. Since ‘of He-e-pwoid’ follows ‘in the House of 
Amun’, that qualification is undoubtedly to be linked up, not with the name of the 
possessing temple, but with the words ‘domain of’ that precede it. Thus we may 
paraphrase as follows : ‘fields in the vicinity of He-e-pwoid belonging to the House of 
Ra^messe-miamun in the House of Amun’. If this interpretation be correct, two reasons 
may be suggested why a foundation of Ramesses 1 1 has been sandwiched in among the 
three foundations of Ramesses HI. As in the Wilbour papyrus, the great Karnak 
temple of Amen-Req King of the Gods, is given precedence over all other temples. To 
that temple belonged, in our Amiens summary, the foundation of ‘Pharaoh’ and the 
first two of Ramesses HI. But ‘the House of Ra^messe-miamun in the House of Amun’ 
is certainly none other than that portion of the vast Karnak complex which comprised 
the famous Hypostyle Hall. As a part of that complex it occurs also in the Wilbour 
papyrus, where, unlike any other Theban temple, it is named actually as sub-heading 
to a paragraph devoted to the great temple of Amen-Re' (§ 117). Perhaps its adminis- 
tration was completely merged in that of the parent temple. I now incline to believe 
that the third foundation of Ramesses HI (5, 6) is identical with what is definitely 
stated in vs. 4, x — q to belong to the temple of Amen-Re^. Administratively, however, 
its relationship to the latter may have been less close. But if this conjecture be thought 
unconvincing, another reason for the precedence of the sanctuary of Ramesses H over 
Ramesses Ill’s third foundation can be found in the vast amount of corn recorded as 
coming from its provincial fields. This amount is nearly three times as much as that 
obtained from the Karnak foundation of Pharaoh, itself greatly in excess of that 
accruing from any of the other foundations. 

To return now to the place-name He-e-pwoid, ^ the translation of which may well be 
‘Mansion over against the stela’ or the like. This name seems unknown except in our 
papyrus, but there is some slender, though rather striking, evidence for associating it 
with the well-known town of Tjebu, the capital of the Xth nome of Upper 

Egypt. Recent discoveries make it nearly certain that Tjebu is to be identified, not with 
Abu Tig, where Sethe was inclined to locate it,- but with Kaw el-Kebir, full 25 kilo- 

^ In rendering the first element of this name without the feminine ending -t preserved in the verv^ ancient 
names of the goddesses Athyr (Hathor) and Xephthys I am guided by the Babylonian HikiiptaJi, the Assyrian 
Hinifisi, and the Coptic oeiiccTe, Gunn has shown me that the status const ructus of feminine nouns as first 
element in Coptic compounds regularly drops the -e(t) of the ending; U'pical examples are i€ii-ig(oT ‘trade’, 
cp-fcunc ‘thorn Oi date-palm’. Accordingly 1 wrote above Hentowe, Nebu rather than Henttowe, Xebtu. 

- Urgeschiciitc, p. 41, on the strength of the statue Cairo 585, which Daressy, who first published it, stated 
was found ‘pres d'Aboutig’, Rec\ Trav. xi, 87. Borchardt, however, in his Statuen u. Statuetten, ii, 140-r, 
gives the more definite information ‘Gekauft 1S86, nach Angabe des Verkaufers gegenuber von Abutig 
gefunden’. Such a statement on the part of a dealer or fellah is naturally unreliable and in any case the person 
represented merely addresses his formula of offering to the god of Tjebu. 


metres farther south. ^ Now an Eighteenth Dynasty statue referring to Tjebu and its god 
gives to its owner ‘the controller H5ri’ the subsidiary title ‘prophet of 

the stela’,- and this strange and singular designation may not improbably have some 
connexion with He-e-pwoid in our papyrus. In the detailed speci- 

fication of the cargoes (rt. pp. 1-4) corn belonging to this foundation of Ramesses II 
is seen to have been put on t5oard at seven or eight different places {a, 1,4. 10; />, 2, 2. 7 ; 
3, II ; c, I, 5; t/, 2, 5. II ; e, 3, 5;/, 3, 8;^, 3, 9; doubtful, 4, 2), and this fact militates 
somewhat against the suggestion that He-e-pwoid, if not merely another name for 
Tjebu, was at least a town in its immediate neighbourhood. One of the places where 
corn was taken on board was Dja'^-ruhe (‘Evening storm’), which the Golenischeff 
Onomasticon (5, 2) mentions as the third town after Akhmim, and the fourth before 
Tjebu. Now the distance between Kaw el-KebIr and Akhmim is well over 50 kilo- 
metres, and if we conjecturally locate Djaf-ruhe midway between the two, it is not easy 
to see how fields there could have belonged to the domain of He-e-pwoid. Aloreover, 
the latter expression would then compete with the ‘domain of Tjebu’, from which 
came part of a consignment belonging to the domain of the House of Ra'^messe-mdamun 
of He-e-pwoid which was handed over to the ship’s captain at ‘the Island of Amun 
Overrunning-his-boundarv’2 (2, 5). However, in support of the view here taken it can 
at least be affirmed that the domain embodying the name of He-e-pwoid shows closer 
connexions with Tjebu than with the other large town mentioned on the recto, namely 
Akhmim. In 3, 5 corn of this domain is shipped at ‘the new island west of J,. 
Inmut’,+ and the latter name recalls a place named ,^3 Inmet, having Mut as its 
goddess, which occurs on the jamb of a late tomb copied by Chassinat at Kaw el-KebIr 
{Bull. Inst, franc, i, 104). We shall find Inmut again in the Griffith fragments, see 
below, pp. 65-6. 

In the summary of Theban foundations contained in p. 5 of the recto, there is placed 
before the Chapels of Nofretiri and Whhotpe a sanctuary bearing the name of Amun 
h-\shafe, ‘great in dignity’. The epithet of Amun here found is, as Sethe has 

pointed out {Amun iind die aciit Urgdtter von Hermopolis, p. 23, in Abh. Berlin), an 
allusion to, or plav of words upon, the ram’s head often affected by Amun of Thebes, 

^ At Kilw were found (i) the stela of a mayor of Tjebu, Dyn. XIX, Brunton, Qau and Badari III, pis. 32-3 
and pp. 20, 32, (2) the stela of a ‘skipper of the boat of the Double pod, lord of Tjehu', Steckewep, Die 
Fiirstengrdbcr von OdzL, pi. 17 with p. 53. I mention only monuments explicitly naming Tjebu ; references to 
its god are found in several other inscriptions from Kaw. Stcindorff (op. cit., p. 5) strongly upholds the identi- 
fication with Kaw el-Kcbir. Kees (ZAS lxxii, 51) rrroundlcssly suggests K 5 m Asfaht 15 km. to the X.W. 

“ The statue is that mentioned in p. 44, n. 2, above. Daressy gave in place of It is not the first time I have 
found Borchardt’s copies of hieroglyphic inscriptions almost incredibly inaccurate. Me omits ^ and then 

reads j . But p' is quite clear on the small photograph vhich he publishes m pi. 105, and this eliminates pn 
as a possibility. The perhaps superfluous between the title and the name is confirmed by the photograph. 

^ See the next note. ,, 

^ It is extremely curious that a place named C' occurs also in P. Wilbour, A 26, 10. 1 1 ; 38, 28, since 

the section in which it occurs deals with localities literally hundreds of kilometres farther north. This coinci- 
dence is enhanced by the fact that the same section of the Wilbour papyrus mentions another ‘Island of Amun 
Over-running-his-boundary’, see above and P. Wilbour A 21 , 25. 27 ; B 10, 21. I can see no way of avoiding 
the conclusion that these two names each referred to two different places in different parts of Upper Egvpt; 
and the same holds of the place-name ‘the Mound of Xahihu’ in P. Brit. Mus. 1044J, below^, p. 59, n. 5. 



cf. the word ‘ram’s head’d It is strange that no less than four personal names in 
the Amiens papyrus should be compounded with the epithet ^Ashafe, the more so 
since Ranke (Ag. Personennamen, 58, ii. 12) could quote only two; the names in the 
papyrus are ^Ashafeyew, i, i; 'Ashafemhab, 3, 4; ^Ashafenakhted 2, lo; 4, 4; and 
'Ashafeheryeb, 3, i. 8. Ranke’s second example, 'Ashafemwese,^ i.e. ‘'Ashafe is in 
Thebes’, confirms the fact, if confirmation were needed, that Amun enjoyed a cult in 
that city under that particular aspect. I am inclined to think the position of House of 
Amun '^Ashafe in the summary (5, g) no mere accident, since Tuthmosis III dedicated 
in the central axis of the Karnak temple a door to the Amun thus called."^ But though, 
accordingly, Tuthmosis III may have been the builder of the Theban chapel of Amun 
'Ashafe, the addition ‘in the Granary of the House of Amun’ suggests that it lay else- 
where than in Karnak itself.^ Evidently this cult gained a fresh popularity in the 
Twentieth Dynasty, all the personal names compounded with the epithet ^Ashafe 
dating from that period. A usurper of the lower tomb of the High-priest Menkheper- 
ra'sonb at Kurna styles himself ‘prophet of Amun ^Ashafe’, and attributes the same 
title to his father also.^ 

1 have dwelt upon the summary too long already, but a last comment of detail has 
still to be made. It is extremely interesting that of the two foundations which Ramesses 
HI added to the Karnak temple (5, 3. 4) one was to give agricultural employment to 
convicted criminals, and the other to his mercenaries of Sherden race — these ver}' 
incongruously coupled with ‘the Royal scribes of the army’. 

The loss of the lower half of the page prevents us from knowing whether the summary 
mentioned further foundations besides the ten enumerated in the upper half. Only 
six of those ten are named in the detailed specifications of cargoes preceding the 
summary, and these are sometimes indicated in forms sufficiently abbreviated to render 
their identity a little uncertain. We can be sure, however, that the four missing founda- 
tions were referred to in the lost parts of the specifications. Conversely, the detailed 
specifications ought to have mentioned no foundation absent from the summary, if the 
latter were to fulfil its purpose completely. It seems impossible, however, to discover 
any equivalent in the summary to the foundation described as ‘House of Amun, 
domain of Khen-Min’ (2, i . 8 ; 3, 10), or to that described as ‘regular (=0 vw 3,14; cf. vs. 
2, x+6; 4, x + 8; 5, x+4) domain of the House of Amun’. In both these expressions 
‘House of Amun’ signifies ‘House of Amen-Re^, King of the Gods’, i.e. the great 
Karnak temple, as is not unusual, and as indeed is proved for the latter expression by 
vs. 4, x-f 8. It will be explained later that ‘domain of Khen-Min’ merely restricts the 
reference to fields falling under the nome administration centred in the town of 
Akhmim, and analogies in the Wilbour papyrus suggest that the term ‘regular domain’ 

* Wh. IV, 456. For two references see Urk. iv, 183 ; Rec. Trav. xx, 42. 

2 Ranke gives a Twentieth D>Tiasty example of this name, but has misinterpreted the sign for -nht as the 
determinative of sfyt. 

^ The same name occurs also in the Theban tomb quoted below in n. 6. 

^ See Porter & Moss, Bibliography, ii, p. 33, under {35). 

5 In Botti & Peet, Giornale, pi. 22, 1 . 17 mention is made of a lady ‘who dwells in “Granary of the House 
of Amun’^ ^ Davies, The Tombs of Menkheperrasonb, &c., pi. 29. 


signifies those fields which were the most ancient possessions of a temple and were no 
longer tied down to any special Royal foundation. There seems little likelihood that 
the corn of ‘domain of Khen-Min’ or that of the ‘regular domain’ was included in the 
amounts which the summary allots to the special departments of the Karnak temple 
named in 5, 2-4, or to the following subordinate temples. Nor again is it probable 
that these two domains were mentioned farther on in lost lines of the summary, since, 
as already pointed out, the summary, in agreement with the practice of the Wilbour 
papyrus, gives precedence to the Karnak temple over all lesser sanctuaries. The only 
hypothesis which has any plausibility is that the two domains were ignored in the 
summary because corn which was not definitely earmarked for the special foundations 
there enumerated would naturally fall into the general stock of the superior religious 
institution governing all the rest. But this hypothesis is pure speculation and is not 
favoured by the verso, so far as the ‘regular domain’ is concerned, since in one of the 
summaries there (vs. 5, x+4) the ‘regular domain’ of the Karnak temple actually stands 
at the top of the list. 

Of the twenty-one ships united in this same expedition, the headings recording the 
names of the captains are preserved in only eight cases. That the ships themselves 
belonged to the great temple of Amun is plain from the words ‘of the House of Amen- 
Re<, King of the Gods’ in one case (3, 13), and from the shorter descriptions ‘of the 
House of Amun’ (i, i. 9; 2, 4; 3, 4) or ‘of this house’ (2, 10; 4, 4. 9) in the rest. It had 
been previously known from the Harris papyrus (4, 12-5, i) that the Theban god 
possessed ships of his own for the transportation of corn,^ though in a document of the 
reign of Ramesses HI they are naturally said to have been made for the temple of 
Medinet Habu, rather than for that of Karnak ; Ramesses added 82 vessels in all, but 
of these some were mere ferry-boats {Harris, 12 b, 11-12). The ships employed in the 
present instance were no mere fishing-boats, as in the Turin papyrus translated above, 
but were cargo-vessels of considerable size, since tw'o of them carried over 900 sacks 
apiece (3,3.12), which at tw'^o bushels to the Egyptian khar or ‘sack’ would weigh about 
42 tons, and would occupy a space of about 2,313 cubic feet.^ Three of the captains 
bear the title hry wsht (3,4. 13 ; 4, 4), but as this is a fairly common designation I 
prefer to render it simply as ‘captain’, rather than as ‘master of a broad boat’ or ‘barge’. 
The more imposing epithet of imy-rrhrw ‘commander of ships’ is given to 

two of the captains (2, 4. 10), and for this epithet ‘admiral’ would be hardly too exalted 
an equivalent. The three other skippers mentioned (i, i. 9; 4, 9) are left without 
description. Apparently one ship came to grief en route, since we thrice read of con- 
signments ‘wEich had been in the ship of Seti,^ son of Psekhemne’ (i, 5; 3, 2; 4, 2). 

The headings are followed in each case by a number of single lines supplying details 
of the cargo, and all following a stereotyped pattern. After the initial ‘given to him’ 
comes the name of the port of lading, or alternatively ‘in this place’. The name of the 
port is usually supplemented by the mention of the particular ‘threshing-floor’*^ whence 

^ For ships used for carrying com see Klebs, Reliefs w. Malereien d. neuen Reiches^ i, 204-5. 

^ From the information kindly given by Prof. J. A. S. Watson already quoted above, p. 21. 

3 With title ‘captain’ in 4, 2. For the word dnw here used see below, p. 68. 



the corn was taken. Then, after ‘being corn of . . the domain and foundation to which 
the consignment belongs are named, and lastly come the amounts together with any 
other information deemed necessary. At the close of each section we find a total giving 
the entire load of the ship, accompanied by a statement of the amount deducted for the 
rations of the crew. 

It is noteworthy that in several cases the same place and threshing-floor yielded of its 
produce to several different ships, whether for economy of time or for mutual control. 
The owners of the threshing-floors were often men whose official position was that of 
rrcdzc ‘controllerV a title common in the Wilbour papyrus and elsewhere in 
connexion with agricultural matters ; of these six are named.- There are also four ‘culti- 
vators ’3 {ihu'ty, above, pp. 21-2), one ‘retainer’ (4, 5), one ‘scribe’ (2, 2. 7; 3, ii), one 
‘prophet’ (i, 7; 4, 7), one ordinary ‘priest’ (i, ii;2, 5. ii), and a ‘chief workman’ (1,2). 
So far as I am aware, the title ‘chief workman’ (ry n ist) has been found hitherto only in 
connexion with the Theban Necropolis, to which this particular individual is unlikely 
to have belonged. The twice-mentioned ‘prophet’ interests us because his title 
(i) 7 ! 4 > 7) incorporates the name of a temple mentioned as a town in the Golenischeff 
Onomasticon (5, 1-2); there ni“=\l ^2(?J © Pi-mehye-weben, occurs just after 
Abydos and The-storehouses-of-Thinis and just before Thinis itself, this latter being 
followed immediately by Akhmim."^ Pi-mehye-weben may well be the southernmost 
locality mentioned in the Amiens papyrus. J\Iost of the places, except those already 
discussed, are unknown, but the mentions of the ‘domain of Khen-min’ (Akhmim) and 
of the ‘domain of Tjebu’ practically confine the activities of the ships to the stretch of 
river bordered by the Panopolite (IX) and the Aphroditopolite or Antaeopolite (X) 
nomes. A point of interest about the place-names is the prominence of Amun in 
connexion with ‘islands’ iw), no less than five being called after, and their names 

including epithets of, that god.^ The same peculiarity is found in the Wilbour papyrus, 
where the names are in a different part of Egypt. Was Amun regarded specially as the 
creator of new land ? I find no reference to such a belief in the hymns. In this con- 
nexion it must be remembered that the Egyptian word for ‘island’ need not necessarily 
refer to islands in our sense of the word; the modern Egyptian term gezlrah here offers 
a warning. 

^ In view of the corresponding verb {Wh. ii, 413, 10) meaning to 'look after’, ‘manage’ I now prefer the 
rendering ‘controller’ to ‘agent’, which I formerly used. 

2 They are: Amen ...1,6; ^A.nere, 2, i. 8; 3, 10; Pennestowe, 3, 14; Phesy, 3, 7; Pentwere, 3, 5; and 
Sethiwenmaf, 4, 10. 

^ They are : ^Ashafeher\xb, 3, 1.8; Peieroy, 3, 6 ; Wennofre, 3, 10 ; Pentwere, 4, i. 

Egyptologists have shown themselves strangely shy of expressing an opinion as to the exact whereabouts of 
Thinis (This). That it is in the neighbourhood of Girgah is certain from the frequency of monuments there 
mentioning either the god Onuris or persons whose name is compounded with his ; so especially at Nag< ed-Der 
(Dunham, Xaga ed-Der Stelae, index, pp. 109-10) and not far away at Xag^ el-Mashayikh (besides Porter & 
IMoss, Bibliography, v, 28, see the articles by Kees in ZAS Lxxiii, 77 ff. ; lxxv, 85 ff.), but a couple of stelae of 
the kind were found by Garstang at Er-Rakaknah on the west bank {Tombs of the Third Dynasty, pi. 33). For 
my part I am inclined to follow Sayce in identifying Thinis with Nag^ el-Mashayikh, but Kees, who knows the 
latter site well, evidently does not favour that view, though his evidence for the name Behde possibly shows 
no more than that this was an exceptional designation of the place. 

5 CJ.y however, below, p. 66 , what seem to have been three separate places all described as ‘ Island of Khons’. 


The actual figures remain to be discussed, and it is pleasing to have little fault to 
find with the scribe’s arithmetic. Confirmation is obtained of the custom of writing 
amounts of it-m-it ‘barley’ in black, and of hdt ‘spelt’ in red. Besides the explicit 
evidence in vs. 2, x-i-p quoted above, p. 27, n. i, the recto a few times juxtaposes black 
and red figures {e.g. 3, 2), and the same numbers are as a rule kept apart in the totals 
{e.g. 2, 3 ; 3, 3). Obviously this has been done with a purpose, and the purpose can only 
have been to distinguish spelt and barley. Spelt predominates greatly. The totals 
concluding the specifications of the cargoes of the different ships give the sum, fault- 
lessly or nearly so, of the first numbers in the foregoing lines. Thus the total in 3, 12 
names 10 sacks in black, and Qoqf sacks in red; the black ten sacks are found in 3, ii, 
and the six preceding lines give in red, as the first of their figures, 260+ i oof + 328! -f 
iio + 5-(- 100 = 904! sacks. Similarly the totals in i, 8; 2, 9, and 4, 8 add up correctly, 
if the presence of a subsequently neglected quarter-sack in i, 4 is ignored, and if the 
227! 5 sacks in 2, 6 are disregarded as being part of the 600 sacks of 2, 5, a point which 
will be discussed very shortly. The remaining totals cannot be tested, some of the items 
composing them being lost. It may be interesting to compare the cargoes of the various 
ships, so far as we are able to do so. Taking the totals in order, the respective amounts 
of spelt are 424, 840, 700, 93of |^, 904f, 310, and 300^ sacks, to all of which except the 
last must be added a small quantity of barley, namely [32!],^ i2f, 10, 50, 10, and 28 
sacks respectively. To these totals are appended the following amounts of spelt to be 
deducted for the rations of the crew: x-f 9, 59, 63, qof, 42, 51, and 38 sacks respectively; 
it will be seen that these rations bear no fixed proportion to the cargoes carried, and 
that the pretensions of the crews transporting the heaviest burdens were smaller than 
those of the rest. 

In the Turin corn-collecting papyrus the reader will have noted the Egyptian habit 
of giving a larger number first of all, and of then adding the details composing it ; the 
expression used for this purpose is ^ p , 7 , 'i^cp-st ‘details (lit. “opening”) of it’. In many 
of the entries of the Amiens papyrus there is a similar itemization of the consignments 
obtained from a given temple-domain, the number of sacks first being stated in full 
and only afterwards being explained in detail. A strange feature of these itemizations 
is that they start, instead of ending, with the word for ‘balance’. ^ There can be no 

^ A lacuna has destroyed this number in the total itself (i, 8), but it is preser\xd in i , 6. 

2 Wb, II, 63, II renders Resthetrag^ which is approximately correct. I prefer, however, to reserv'e the 
translation ‘remainder’ for spyt used e.g. below, p. 57. Of the three examples given by Wb. under 

63, II the first two are highly problematical, and ought to be suppressed. The third {Mayer A, 4, 7-8) not 
only admirably illustrates the sense ‘balance’, but also hints at the etymology ‘to remain’: it runs, ‘the ladv 
Ese . . , (received) i dehen of silver; she gave me 2 kite silver; balance remaining with her ( ^ jl 8 kite'. 

Under 64, i Wb. gives other examples, but they require much more context to vindicate their meaning. The 
first deals with some work done for a lady on some coffins, and ends ‘Total, all the money for the coffins, silver, 
329 deben. Received from her ^ | 1 ^), 188 deben. Balance to be paid, 141 dehen'. This example is published 
Botti & Peet, Giornale, pi. 41, 1 . 21, where ' tvv! ^ <? l of IF6., a reading for which 

I was responsible. Examining the photograph, I now believe the doubtful group to be a correction or confusion 
of some kind; probably the scribe intended ^ rdit'zc. In Pleyte & Rossi, op. cit., 91, 3, in a 

very similar and convincing context \ ^ - vin r diVto is indubitably the right reading. This is TT^.’s fourth 
example, the fifth being op. cit., 155, 16, in the corn-tax collecting papyrus translated above. Another excellent 




doubt about the meaning of the word ^ mn, thus written in full rt. 3, 2, but else- 
where in the papyrus abbreviated to ^ . A good example from another source merits 
translation here in the text of my article, since it refers to the taxation of corn, and is 
therefore relevant to our subject. A single sheet of papyrus at Turin (Pleyte and Rossi, 
op. cit., 158) bears the heading: ‘The details of the balance of the corn which has to 

be exacted^ in the town of Madi {i.e. Medamut) through the stable-master ,'i[|]n) 

Alensneu of the Residence’ ; after this follow the names of nine builders (or potters ?) ; 
the amounts were never written, unless they are lost beyond the present margin on the 
left. In the Amiens papyrus the second of the two items indicates the exact source of 
the smaller part of the consignment put on board, while the first item, introduced by 
mn, must state the ‘balance’ obtained in the ordinary way from the previously mentioned 
estates. The words introducing the second item are, as a rule, greatly abbreviated. 
The most instructive example is 2, 5. 6, because in that exceptional instance 600 sacks 
of corn dispatched from fields of He-e-pwoid belonging to the Karnak temple of 
Ramesses II (see above) are itemized as derived, not from two, but from three sources; 
the third has a whole line to itself, and can for that reason dispense with the usual 
abbreviation. If I understand rightly, of the 600 sacks of spelt 227! | were contributed 
from fields in the same neighbourhood belonging to the House of Seti-Merenptah at 
Thebes (2, 6), 37J ^ sacks came from a foundation of which the much shortened designa- 
tion is ‘domain of Tjebu’, while the balance of 335 sacks was derived (like the consign- 
ments of all entries where a specification of the kind is not added) from the fields of the 
foundation that dispatched the whole amount. It seems clear in this instance, as well 
as in a closely parallel entry concerning a similar amount of 600 sacks put on board 
another ship (2, ii),^ that the temple of Seti-merenptah stood under some sort of 
financial obligation to the temple of Ramesses II. The Wilbour papyrus teems with 
evidence of similar obligations between temples, between temple and Crown, and so 
forth; much is still obscure in this matter, but it seems that a comparison of the two 
papyri is bringing us a step nearer to the full comprehension of both. 

The conclusions of the last paragraph throw some light on the abbreviated items 
there alluded to. In 3, 7 a consignment of 328I sacks shipped from fields belonging 
to Pharaoh’s foundation at Karnak are analysed into a balance of i28f sacks and a 
contribution of 200 sacks labelled ‘domain of Khen-Min’, and i, ii has an exactly 
similar entry though there the name of the dispatching institution is lost; in 2, 5, as we 
have just seen, one of the two explanatory items gives ‘domain of Tjebu’, a designation 

proof will be found in Ostr. Cairo (ed. Cemy), 25543, rt. 14-17. In the great majority of instances, however 
the meaning must be taken on trust; so a number of times on the vs. of the Amiens papyrus, and in Text B of 
the Wilbour, where it refers, not to money, but to land. There appear to be other technical uses of mn in 
business documents, but they are unknown to Wb, In Cemy, Ostr. hier. . . Deir el Medineh, 230, ^ above 
several crossed-out lines might w’ell have the force of our proof-readers’ *st€t\ The expression 
discussed Spiegelberg, RechnungeUy pp. 45-6, has been only half understood by him. The strict meaning may 
be ‘at the fixed rate of’, but the point is that certain large quantities of kyUestisAo^ves were tested foi weight bv 
samples of 10 loaves to the 30 debeti, w hile other large quantities w^ere ‘measured entire’. 

2 Here the items comprising the 600 sacks are only two, a balance of 140 sacks, and a contribution from the 
House of Sethos, i.e. Seti-Merenptah, amounting to 460 sacks. For the last figure see above, p. 39, n. 4 


differing from ‘domain of Khen-Min’ only in the substitution of the name of Kaw 
el-Kebir for that of Akhmim. Now in 2, i. 8; 3, 10, where there is no corresponding 
itemization, the consignment consists of corn of ‘(domain of)’' the House of Amun, 
domain of Khen-Min’, where ‘House of Amun’, as already explained, doubtless means 
the ‘House of Amen-Re', King of the Gods’, i.e. the Karnak temple. The Wilbour 
papyrus enables us to understand what is meant by ‘House of Amun, domain of Khen- 
Min’, since we there find (A 39, 18) the precisely parallel expression ‘House of Amun, 
domain of Hardai’. The latter occurs in a context of which it is at least one of several 
possible interpretations that to a smaller local temple named ‘House of Amun, Founder- 
of-the-Earth’ this domain contributed part of the corn which would otherwise have had 
to be entirely forthcoming from the harvest gathered by the smaller temple itself. There 
are in the Wilbour many examples of similar relations between two temples, and the 
contributor of the part (if the said possible interpretation be correct) may be either a 
small or a large temple, either one in the provinces or one at Thebes or another capital 
city, and correspondingly the receiving temple may be large or small, provincial or 
otherwise. Thus far the conditions seem exactly similar to those presupposed in the 
Amiens papyrus. But to return to our parallel ‘House of Amun, domain of Hardai’ — 
whenever in the Wilbour an expression of this precise type occurs, it is always in con- 
nexion with a temple at Thebes or Heliopolis which presumably had some of its 
provincial agricultural affairs managed by the nome-administration in some prominent 
nome-metropolis. Now the Wilbour papyrus employs a peculiar sort of double book- 
keeping which gives a little more information about a domain like ‘House of Amun, 
domain of Hardai’. The heading of the paragraph containing the cross-entn,- to A 39, 18 
would, but for a simple reason explained in the footnote,- have run : ‘Apportioning domain 
of the House of Amen-Ref, King of the Gods, domain of the Tract of Hardai’ (22, ii). 
Here, to begin with, the expanded expression ‘the Tract of Hardai’ ( >\^(?®) 

reveals that not the mere town was meant, but the nome of which that town — it is 
Cynopolis — was the administrative centre. ^ So too it will have been with the Khen- 
Min (Panopolis) and the Tjebu (Antaeopolis) of the Amiens papyrus. But further we 
learn from the Wilbour that a domain of this kind was cultivated by small-holders in 
much the same position as private owners, if not actually such ; these small-holders were 
men in all kinds of positions, or might even be women; most of their tax-payments 
apparently remained with the temple mentioned in the paragraph heading, but occa- 
sionally the pavments were passed on — such at least seems the most plausible hvpo- 
thesis — by that temple to the one mentioned in the heading of the paragraph to which 
there is a corresponding cross-entr}'.'^ 

Other abbreviated expressions in the itemizations of the Amiens papyrus are ‘the 
domain of Pharaoh’ in 3, 5 and ‘Nesamun’ in i, 4. The latter is utterly obscure, but 

■ The twofold writing of rmnyt only in 3, 10, as explained above, p. 38, n. 9. 

^ Several previous paragraphs having dealt with various other domains of the great temple of Karnak, in 
A 22, 1 1 ‘of this house’ is substituted for the full designation. 

^ For the feminine word k'ht as practically the equivalent of ‘nome’ see below, p. 65. 

* Such cases will be described in my comm.entary to the Wilbour papyrus as ‘/iw/j-entries of Type B’, and 
correspond to ‘pos/i-entries of Type A’ in the paragraphs devoted to the temples to which the transference is made. 



the former is evidently an abbreviation for ‘domain of Amen-Re', King of the Gods, 
which Pharaoh newly founded’ (5, 2), intermediate forms being ‘domain which 
Pharaoh newly founded’ (3, 7) and ‘domain which Pharaoh founded’ (4, 10). The 
last-named occurs in an itemization where the balance-item of 200 — 52 = 148 sacks is 
omitted. The balance-item is, indeed, superfluous everywhere, since the subtraction 
could easily be made by the reader for himself. It is, however, strange that in one or 
two cases (3, 2; 4, 2 with the total 4, 3; so too in the summary, 5, 2) the balance-item 
alone should be given, withholding from our knowledge the complementary item that 
is indispensable. Can the latter item have been left over for later payment ? 

So full a commentary has been devoted to the recto of the Amiens papyrus, that 
I shall greatly abbreviate my explanations of the verso. Of this, however, a transla- 
tion must be given to enable those wishing to do so to follow up the topics already 
discussed. Page i of the ve^so contains little more than a few figures. The top half of 
p. 2 is lost : 

VS. 2, X-p I 

x-f 2 



x + 5 


brought from 

the house of the prophet (?) Ken(?) . . . from the farm-land that he tilled, 4I y~ 
sacks ; balance, 12-, 

[Given to] him (on the) river-bank 

Hori, brought of com of the priest Tja^o i+x sacks, being corn of domain of 
the controller Ptahmose by the hand of the cultivator Efenennebu, brought from 
the house of the overseer of cattle Amenhotpe, i~ sacks. 

[Given to] him on this river-bank, being corn of domain 

•••■; V2i. 

[Given to] him on the river-bank of Khmun- in year i , third month of the Winter 

season, [day] 10 by the hand of the scribe Pennestowe, 

brought from the house of the sandal-maker Heryebhima<e from the farm-land 
balance 2 /^ 

that he tilled, 2^ 4j sacks, total 6| (?), balance 4. 

[Given] to him on this river-bank in year i, third month of the Winter season, 
day 17, being com of domain of the House of Amun under the authority of the 

overseer of of Pharaoh, the overseer of hunters [Ra<]messenakhte, brought 

from [the house of] the lady Rokha (?) from the farm-land that [she] tilled 4jj 
sacks, bala n ee 2~ sack & . 


•3 [Given to] him on this river-bank, being corn of regular domain [of the House of 

A]mun, being com of region of by the hand of the scribe Pennestowe, 

contribution (?) of the scribe P^aemtope, in the name of the scribe Pen (?) 

[from] the farmland that he tilled, sacks. 

^ The verso teems with cancellations, diacritical marks, superlinear additions, &c. These are reproduced 
in print just as they stand in the original, mostly without comment. 

2 Coptic ujjJLO'yn, Hermopolis Magna, the modem El-Ashmunen. 

3 In red as often below, both singly and also twice repeated. Such dots are common as diacritical marks in 
other Ramesside texts, see e.g. Text B of the Wilbour, and P, Louvre 3171 (below, p. 57), and may mean that 
the line has been checked and found correct. 

^ We expect here the name of a nome-capital, cf. rt. 3, 14. Just possibly Nefrusi was the administrative 
capital of the Hermopolite nome (XV) at this time, see below, vs. 2, x-h9. 


vs, 2, x-f 7 • [Giv e n - 4 e ] - h i ffl -- on - this ^iv e r -’ bank, [b e ing - corn of] domain of th e Hous e- of 

- Amun . . . domain of t he Hous e of - Ragmes se' miarnttn - in t h e H o use of Am&n under 
the authority of the Stew ard, which was brought of corn of th e- gandah mak e r 
Heryebhimafe . . balanc e 1 - 4 4I. 

xH-8^ • [Given to] him on the river-bank of the island of . . being corn of the scribe 

P brought from Pshes^ in year i, third month of the Winter season, day 

29, 3 sacks. 

. . . . sai 

x-{-9 • • [Given to] him on the river-bank of the town of, being corn of domain of 
Nefru[si,^ by the] hand of the scribe of the House of Amun Pennestowe under the 
authority of the Steward in year 2, first month of the Summer season, day 7, 
barley 41 sacks, spelt f sacks, total 5 sacks. 

x+io • • [Given to] him on the [river-]bank of this place, being corn of this domain by 
his hand, which he brought from the House of the Sherden^ in year 2, first month 
of the Summer season, day 12, 6 sacks, 
on [this] river-bank 

x-hii Given to him, being corn of domain of by the hand of the controller 

H5ri, brought from the house of the scribe Pmerkae (?), 2~ sacks. 
x-hi2 • Given to him on this river-bank, being corn of domain of the House of Amun by 
the hand of the controller Setekhmose 6 sacks. 
x-hi3 • Given to him on the river-bank of P-sha-wa^b,-^ [being corn of] domain of the 
House of Amun under the authority of the overseer of cattle Rafia by the hand of 
Bekenkhons and the scribe 'Anti[mose], 5 sacks. 

After a blank space of 4*5 cm. follows a total doubtless intended to sum up the 
amounts of corn recorded on vs. p. 2 ; 

vs. 2, X+14 Total, 8, sacks. Total, 4||. 

^ The line is almost completely crossed out, as shown. In front of it, in addition to the red dot, and clearly 
referring to this cancellation, are diacritical signs which might well be read |. These same signs are twice 
found before a cancelled line in the Wilbour papyrus, once on the recto (A 27, 5) and once on the verso 
(B 19, 26). A daring h^’pothesis might suppose them to mean ‘feet beaten’ and to refer to bastinado administered 
to the tax-payer concerned. The objection is that such punishment w ould presumably have led to the enforce- 
ment, not the annulment, of the tax-payment in question. 

2 The Golenischeff Onomasticon (5, 5) places ^ Pi-shes next but one after Kais, Cusae, the modem 

El-Kuslyah, and just before Khmun, i.e. Hermopolis Magna, the modem El-Ashmunen. Sethe, in his Bau- und 
Denkmalsteine (Sitzungsb. Berlin^ i933)> 25, points out how well that position suits the neighbourhood of 
El-^Amamah and the quarries of He-nub (Hat-nub). The other tow ns mentioned in the present text completely 
confirm that view. The name, wTitten in the Amiens papyrus with instead of m I — the interchange is not 

infrequent — w^ould, as Sethe further points out, be an exact translation of ^AXa^darpcov JloXis, but this is located 
by both Ptolemy and Pliny much farther north. 

3 The statues of a mayor of Nefrusi and his wife {Ann. Sere, xviii, 53-5) have been found near Balansurah, 

on the west bank about 16 km. farther north than El-Ashmunen, but this site does not agree w ith the Golenischeff 
Onomasticon (5, 5), w’here Nefmsi immediately follows Khmun and precedes Q He-were. He-were 

(Gauthier, op. cit. iv, 58) is undoubtedly only a late wTiting of {op. cit. iv, 37), if only for the reason 

that both had the same deities, the ram-headed Khnum and a goddess Hkt sometimes thought of as a frog and 
sometimes written Hkfyt ‘female mler’. Griffith {Beni Hasan, ii, 20) w’as perhaps the first to identify Hr-wr 
with Hur, a mound 13 km. to the south-wxst of Beni Hasan, which seems ver>^ plausible, the more so since 
the Kamak list of goddesses (Bmgsch, Thesaurus, 1408) places Hkfyt of He-w ere before the goddess Pakhe, 
i.e. south of Speos Artemidos. Reasons will be given below^ (p. 55, n. 3) for not accepting Sethe’s localization 
of Hr-zer at Shekh ^badah, the Greek Antinoupolis. The upshot of this discussion seems to be that w^e must 
seek Nefrusi only a short distance to the north of El-Ashmunen. 4 E^nknow n localities. 



It seems likely that p. 2 of the verso constituted a whole complete in itself, and 
enumerated, much in the manner of the recto, the items comprised in the cargo of a 
single ship. Here, however, there is the difference that the account of the cargo is not 
followed by a summary collecting the amounts under the heads of the religious institu- 
tions to which they belonged. The reason clearly lies in the different nature of the 
items, which appear to be mainly tax-returns or rents from private tenants ; r/., however, 
vs. 2, x-f'5. 6. 12. 13 and the cancelled line 7. The region of collection is evidently 
the Hermopolite nome. The total at the end is quite irrational, since, as vs. 3, x+ 1 shows, 
the last figure ought to add together the barley (black) and the spelt (red) in the previous 
total where they are kept distinct. 

The top half of vs. p. 3 is lost, and all that is left of this page is a total: 
vs. 3, x-f- 1 Total 6, 60 j j sacks. Total 66f. 

In the final figure, as in rt. i, 4, the small fraction of | sack is ignored as of no impor- 
tance. Doubtless p. 3 contained the details of the cargo of a single ship. 

Apart from some insignificant jottings, the verso now becomes blank for the space 
of 77 cm. Then follows the account of two more ships, quite in the style of the recto. 
The top half of vs. p. 4 is lost : 

VS.4, X— I (tiny traces only) 

x-f 2 Given to him in Ta(?) . . . sabu, being corn of domain of the [House] of Amen-Re<, 
King of the Gods, under the authority of the Steward, which is in farm-land of Nefrusi, 
by the hand of the scribe Pennestowe 5 sacks. 
x^3 Given to him in this place, being corn of domain of this house under his authority 
by his hand, brought by the Sherden Kharoy Jj j sacks. 
x^4 Given to him in Na(y)-UsimaWe^-miamun on the river-bank of Khmun, being corn 
of domain of the House of Amen-Re^, King of the Gods, under the authority of the 
Steward, which is in farm-land of Nefrusi, by the hand of the scribe Pennestowe, 
brought by the scribe P^^amtope from^ farm-land that he tilled sacks, 
x-rs Total given to him, 50 sacks. 

x-l-6 Total, this expedition, 2 ships, making corn- 5 J05 sacks. Total, no 55f.^ 
x-f 7 Corn^ of domain of the House of Amen-ReS King of the Gods, under the authority 

of the Steward, by the hand of the scribe Pennestowe, 60 sacks. 
x 4-8 Corn of regular^ domain of the House of Amen-ReS King of the Gods, under his 
authority, from farm-land of Nefrusi. 5 sacks. 
x-h9 Corn of domain of the House of Amen-Req King of the Gods, the iMaker of New 
Land (?),^ under the authority of the Royal scribe, overseer of granaries, Ra^messenakhte 
4f sacks. 

x-l-io Corn of domain of the House of ^lut by the hand of the scribe Ptahmose 2^ sacks. 

Here the chief point of interest is the place-name Nay-Usima^re<-miamun, said to 
be ‘on the river-bank of Khmun’, i.e. Hermopolis, El-Ashmunen. The town, which 

^ The preposition r is doubtless a mistake for m, cf. vs. 2, x^ i ; x + S* 

^ I am not wholly convinced of the correctness of the reading given in my edition, so ignore this problem 
here. ^ The last number is quite obscure. 

^ Here begins the summary’ ; so too below vs. 5, x-r 4 ' '’For this expression see above, p. 46. 

^ Comparison with rt. 5, 6 makes it well-nigh certain that ^ ^ ^ I is to be read and that the founda- 
tion of Harnesses III discussed above, p. 44, is meant. My provisional edition must be altered accordingly. 


has two paragraphs devoted to it in the Wilbour papyrus (Text A, §§ 89, 140), is there 
mentioned as possessing a temple called ‘The House of Thoth, Pleased at Truth'. 
The name Nay-Usima^re<-miamun suggests a colony or settlement of Ramesses III, 
since the Coptic means ‘those belonging to'. There exists a wine-jar^ men- 
tioning a vineyard in Nay-Usimare<^-setpenre<,“ i.e. with the prenomen of Ramesses II, 
and unless this was in the Delta, like many vineyards, the place might be the same as 
Nay-Usimare<^-miamun, the name having been later altered by Ramesses III. Now if 
the reader will consult the map, he will see that the nearest point on the river from 
El-Ashmunen is exactly opposite Esh-Shekh Tbadah, the site of the ancient Antinou- 
polis, and here are the remains of an important temple of Ramesses IL^ Is it not at 
Esh-Shekh Tbadah that we must place Nay-Usima^re^-miamun? 

The only other remark I have to make on p. 4 is one that applies to the whole of the 
verso : the amounts of corn mentioned seem too small to have formed the entire cargoes 
of the ships concerned. 

Verso, p. 5 again constitutes a unit, since in its summary^ the line x-hy is substantially 
identical with the line x + 2 in the summary^ of p. 6. This would be irrational if what 
remains of p. 6 were the continuation of the summary^ of p. 5. Moreover, that sum- 
mary would be far too extended. 

vs. 5, x4-i (nothing legible) 

x+2 [Given] to him in this place, being [corn] of domain of the House of Amen-Re^ King 
of the Gods, under the authority of Rana, overseer of cattle of the House of Amun, by 
the hand of the scribe Antimose ; they gave — ditto-^ — j sacks . 5 
x-r3 Tot.\l given to him, 4 g sacks, corn . . . (?). 

x-f 4 Corn of regular domain^ of the House of Amen-ReS King of the Gods, under the 
authority of the Steward, by the hand of the controller Setekhmose, 6 sacks, 
x-f 5 Corn of domain of the House of Amen-ReS King of the Gods, under his authority, 

which is in farm-land of Nefrusi, by the hand of the scribe Pennestowe j sacks, 

x-f 6 Corn of domain of the House of Amen-ReS King of the Gods, under the authority 
of the First Prophet of Amun, by the hand of the scribe Nesdhowt 5/ j sacks, 
x-f 7 Corn of domain of the House of Amen-Re^ King of the Gods, under the authority of 
Rada, overseer of cattle of the House of Amun, by the hand of the scribe Antimose, 
8 sacks . 7 

x-f 8 Corn of domain of the House of Mut, the Great, Lady of Ishru, by the hand of the 

controller Nekhemut, 2 sacks. 

x-f 9 Corn of domain of this house, by the hand of the controller Ptahmose ij sacks, 

x-f 10 Corn of domain of this house, by the hand of the controller Tjanwend 2/ sacks. 

In the sixth and last page of the verso, which runs nearly up to the inner margin of 

^ Spiegelberg, Hieratic Ostracay 19, no. 145. 

2 JEA V, 1 88-9. I no longer think this can be the same as Nay-Ra^messe-miamOn in Anast. iv, 6, ii. 

3 For details see the references in Porter & Moss, Bibliography y iv, 175-7. The list of scenes on p. 176 

shows that Thoth was just as prominent there as Khnum, if not more so; and there is no mention at all of the 
frog-goddess Heke, KhnQm's partner at 9 ^ 0 , which Sethe sought to place here {Urgeschicht€y p. 51), but 
which Griffith much more plausibly located at Hur about 9 km. north-west of El-Ashmunen, see p. 53, n. 3. 

^ The previous lines being lost, we cannot know to what this 'ditto’ refers. 

5 Part only of the amount mentioned below in the summary, vs. 5, x — 7. 

* See above, p. 46. ^ See above, n. 5. 


the roll, only parts of the summary are left, the foregoing specification of the ship’s 
cargo being entirely lost. 

vs. 6, x+i Com of the Portable Shrine’ of Muter£(?),broughtbythescribePmershewne,5sacks.^ 

x-f2 Corn of the House of Amen- Re', King of the Gods, under the authority of the 

overseer of eattle Rada, brought by the scribe 'Antimose, 5 sacks. 
x-r3 Corn of the House of Amen-Re , King of the Gods, brought by the scribe Pneb'apred, 
6 sacks. 

x-f 4 Corn of the House of Amen-Re', King of the Gods, brought by the priest Ere'o, by 

the hand of the scribe Nesamun, f sack. 
x-r5 Corn of — ditto^ — brought by the deputy P'an, by his hand ^ sack. 

x+6 Corn of — ditto — brought in place of the honey ij sacks; total i8| sacks, 

x+y Corn of the House of Amun which he+ took at the beginning^ — 9 sacks. 
x+8 Corn which Pmershewne gave him, 8 sacks; total, 17. 
x+9 Total, all the corn which he took 355 sacks. 

Note the characteristically Egyptian way in which the scribe twice (x-f 6, x+8) 
checks the amounts given in the previous items. All the figures add up correctly. 

§ 4. P. Louvre 3171 

An Eighteenth Dynasty analogon to the Amiens papyrus is provided by No. 3171 of 
the Louvre, a strip of papyrus 63 cm. broad and i6-6 cm. high^ gummed upon paper. 
Deveria, in his Catalogue des manuscrits egyptiens, pp. 184-6, gives a description and 
translation which are remarkably good considering that they were written sixty years 
ago. No facsimile has been published, but the text is given, together with a translation 
and notes, in Spiegelberg’s Rechnungen aus der Zeit Setis I, pi. 18 with pp. 29-30 and 
74-6. In addition to this I have been able to use a careful transcription by Peet which 
I hope to reproduce at some future time in my Ramesside Administrative Documents. 
The facsimiles of a few individual signs given by Peet confirm the date ascribed to the 
manuscript by all three scholars above mentioned.'^ 

The first column is too much damaged for much of interest to be elicited. L. i 
mentions ‘year 9’, this of some value because 3, 8, as we shall see, speaks of ‘seed of 
{i.e. for) year 10’. L. 2 gives part of a personal name. The third line, upside down, gives 
the opening words of a didactic treatise of which a considerable part of the beginning 
is contained in the leather MS. Brit. Mus. 10258.® L. 4 offers evidence, confirmed by 
I, 8; 2, 8 of two different kinds of grain, the one kind, no doubt barley, written in black, 

1 See above, pp. 29-30. 

2 All the figures on this page being black, perhaps the scribe was not here seeking to differentiate between 
barley and spelt. 

3 At this point the scribe (like the present translator) tired of constantly repeating ‘the House of Amen-Re^ 
King of the Gods*. 

^ The pronoun here and in the next tvvo lines refers to the ship’s captain. 

5 Not ‘previously*, which would be hr hn, cf. the Turin tax-collecting papyrus, rt. 3,8. 

^ The figures are those given by Peet. There is something wrong with Deveria*s statement of the height 

7 In particular, the back-turned strokes for kj characteristic of the Eighteenth Dynasty. 

® See ZAS ix, 117. JMany ostraca contain parts of the text. Some years ago I surrendered to M. Kuentz 
my considerable material on this composition, but whether in the present difficult circumstances he will be 
able to produce his edition is, of course, uncertain. 



and the other kind, doubtless spelt, written in red; Peet gives as the probable figures 

‘200 J900, total 2100’. In 1. 5 we read ‘ship of Amenem [harvest-tax?] of the 

deputy-superintendent, 205 sacks’. This amount, added to ‘j6 sacks’ in 1. 7 and 
‘20 70 sacks’ in 1, 8 yields the ‘total, 331’ given at the end of the latter line after a lacuna. 
But the tiny traces of 1. 6 look as though they too gave an amount of corn, and this would 
throw the reckoning out. Lastly, 1. 9 names ‘. . . child of the privy apartment^ Rish[a]’, 
^.3,4, but in what connexion is obscure. The rest of the column is lost. 

Of col. 2 the first nine lines are nearly complete : 

2, I The cultivator Alahu, son of Amenhotpe, in the Village^ of I\Ieh(?), harvxst-tax, Jooo sacks. 

Disposal of it, conveyance by river to the granaiy^ of IMemphis : 

•3 Ship of Amenhotpe, son of Neferh 5 tep 400 sacks 

• Ship OF Hewnufe 3x4 sacks, total 714, 

2, 5 Remainder 286 sacks 

Details of the rest: taken by the quartermaster of the army,^ of Tjuna, 200 sacks. 

Deficit with the cultivator Alahu 86 sacks. 

• The cultivator Nebnufe in the Village of Teti, harvxst-tax 50 606 f sacks, 

total 656!. 

2, 9 • Disposal of it, conveyance by river to the granar}" of [Memphis by the scribe Penroy: 

The rest of col. 2 is lost. Col. 3 then continues as follows: 

3,1 • The cultivator Amenmose in VIesyt, harv*est-tax, J42J sacks 

• Disposal of it, conveyance by river to the granary of IMemphis by the scribe Penroy: 

• Ship of Akitesub,^ son of Amenhotpe 5x4 sacks 

• Ship of Hita of the river-journey, being lading of Risha • 

3, 5 • Given to him in the Island of Ibi, being corn of the cultivator Amenmose, 176 - sacks. 

• Given to him in the Village of Idima, being corn of — ditto — xj| sacks. 

• Given to him in this place in the house of Huy the black, — ditto — jyf sacks. 

• Given to him^ for seed of year 10 — ditto — 80 sacks. 

Total gone out 821^ sacks 

3, 10 Remainder 600 sacks 

There are traces of an eleventh line, but the rest of the column is lost, and here the 
papyrus comes to a close. 

The title hrd n kp appears to indicate that the bearer, now of course no longer 
a child, had been brought up together with the Royal children. In his interesting article Bull. Inst. fr. xxxvni, 
222, de Linage throws doubt on the reading hrd, but I think certainly wrongly. It is true that one example of 
ihms with the 'child’-determinative does exist (Cairo 20143, c. i), but not followed by n kp. For 
the reading hrd n kpy on the contrary, there is indisputable testimony. 

^ The writing with in place of later is further evidence of the Dyn. XVIII date. The rendering 
‘Village’ will be defended in my commentary on the Wilbour papyrus. 

^ For the dots at the beginning of the lines here and below, see above, p. 52, n. 3. 

^ The word for ‘army’, recognized by neither Spiegelberg nor Peet, seems certain from the latter’s facsimile 
of the trace. For the title see Wb. i, 288, 14, both of the New Kingdom; also de Rouge, Inscr. hier. 56. 

5 For this interesting name embodying that of the god of the Hittites see Ranke, Personennamen, 48, 27; his 
reference to Mel. d' arch. eg. I, 275, shows that de Rouge had studied our papyrus. 

^ The rendering is not quite certain, but Spiegelberg seems right in his remark that np cannot here mean 
‘load’, since ftpyty the Egyptian for this, is feminine. For the name Risha see above, i , 9 ; it is unknown to Ranke. 

’ The pronoun ‘him’ here probably refers to the cultivator Amenmose, whereas in the three previous lines 
it has referred to the ship’s captain Hita. Spiegelberg misread the word for ‘seed’ . 




Spiegelberg made no attempt to define the nature of the text as a whole, and his 
translation shows that he understood it less well than his predecessor. Peet greatly 
improved on the readings of both. To Deveria belongs the credit of recognizing in the 
papyrus the ‘fragment d’un registre de perception d’impot’. The assessments and pay- 
ments of .-tH smw ‘harvest-tax’ due from the two cultivators Mahu and Amenmose 
are completely preserved, and there are remains of several other similar records. In 
marked contrast to the entries on the verso of the Amiens papyrus the assessments are 
large ones and comparable rather to those of the Turin miscellany translated on pp. 20-1 . 
It seems likely that the ‘granary of Memphis’ belonged to the secular administration, 
thus resembling the Theban garner presided over by the mayor of the West of the City 
into which the scribe Dhutmose paid the returns from the khatoAscsids, of Pharaoh, 
see above, p. 26. In both these respects the Louvre papyrus differs from that of 
Amiens, but there is considerable similarity in the account given of the cargoes of the 
individual ships. The figures add up correctly, except that in 3 , i the insignificant amount 
of J sack is overlooked. As we have seen elsewhere, spelt and barley are at first kept 
apart, but subsequently added; the best example is 2, 8. Two points are of special 
interest: from 2, 6 it seems that an army-official was entitled to requisition part of a 
cultivator’s tax, an obviously practical arrangement where taxes were paid in kind ; from 
3, 8 it would seem that, as in Ptolemaic times,* the government lent grain for next year’s 
crop. Of the four place-names only is known; this town Tjuna seems to have 

lain somewhere in the Delta.^ 

§ 5. P. Brit. Mus. 10447 

Further illustration of large assessments imposed upon individual ihwtyzv 

‘cultivators’ is forthcoming in a British Museum papyrus dating from the reign of 
Ramesses II and excellently published by Glanville in JRAS, Jan. 1929, pp. 19-26. 
Since that publication the missing half, formerly in the Musee Guimet and known to 
Glanville only from Spiegelberg’s copy in his Rechnungen mis der Zeit Setis I, p. 77, has 
been joined to its fellow in the British Museum, where I have been able to collate it with 
a view to inclusion in my Ramesside Administrative Documents. For the moment a fresh 
translation and commentary must suffice, and these would have been unnecessary but for 
the more complete text now available and the fact that Glanville’s article is printed in a 
periodical not accessible to every Egyptologist. The admirable remarks with which he 
prefaced his text are confirmed, except in tiny details, by my own more extensive material. 

I Corn of the great statue (named) Ra'messe-miamun Beloved-of-Atum, in the Southern 
province from the town (called) the Mound of Nahihu in Nefrusi, 800^ sacks, details of it: 

’ See Schnebel, Landwirtschaft^ 120 ff. 

= Anast. VI y 48, see my Late-Egyptian Miscellanies y p. 76. Gauthier (op. cit. vi, 72) wrongly follows Brugsch 
in placing Tjuna in the nome of Pithom; both scholars unjustifiably assume that the letter in which Tjuna 
occurs is connected with the following letter with its references to Pithom. The only real clues to the where- 
abouts of Tjuna are the place-names Pi-Nebhotep (II. 17, 30, 42, 49) and Tjebnet ( 11 . lo, 1 1) in the same letter, 
the goddess Nebhotep (Nbt-htp) being identified or associated with lus^as of Heliopolis (P. Harris, i, 4; 25, 2* 
ZAS lAixiy 1 14; see, too, my note Hier. Pap. . . . Ch. Beatty Gift, Text, p. iii, n. 17) and Tjebnet might just 
conceivably be a writing of Tjeb-nute, i.e. Sebennytos. 

3 Perhaps written in black in order to keep the number apart from the following rubric wp-st. The positions 
of black and red are exactly reversed at the end of 1. 3. 


2 Remainder outstanding from' year 54, by the hand of the scribe of this house Amenemone : the 

cultivator [Hu]y (?), son of Ptah[pd]i, and the cultivator Nebwtot,^ son of Ptahmy, 400 sacks. 

3 Year 55, by the hand of the scribe of this house Harmin, in this town, 400 sacks. Details of it : 

4 What is with the stable-master of the Residence^ Hatiay, son of Nakhtmin, of the Mound of 

Nahihu : the cultivator Nebw'ot, son of Ptahmy, 200 sacks. 

5 What is from the town of P'ashpu in the middle countr}'+ of Nefrusi. The cultivator [Huy], 

son of Ptahpdi, whose mother is Bekenbi 200 sacks. Total 800. 

Docket written at the bottom of the left half of the verso, so placed as to be visible 
when the papyrus was folded: 

Account (?) of the great statue of Ra'messe-miamun Beloved-of-Atum. 

There is no means of knowing where the great statue of Ramesses II here referred to 
was set up. It may have been, as Glanville surmises, ‘in some small temple or local 
shrine of Atum’ near Nefrusi in the Hermopolite nome.^ But I am inclined to suspect, 
both on account of the epithet ‘great’ and because of the reference to Atum, that it was 
erected in a temple at Heliopolis. If so, the fields supplying 400 sacks of corn annually 
to the cult of the statue may have been the gift of some rich functionary at Nefrusi, just 
as the Royal Scribe and Great Steward Amenhotpe presented 210 arouras of land in the 
Northern province and 220 that had been given him by Pharaoh to the statue of 
Amenophis III which that monarch had placed in his mortuary temple at Memphis.^ 
The Amiens papyrus has shown that comparatively insignificant chapels at the Capital 
could possess fields at a distance, and the Wilbour papyrus contains further evidence 
of the kind. It is true that in 1 . i the words ‘in the Southern province’ are ambiguous 
in their application ; the docket proves that they are not part of the name of the statue, 
but they might qualify either ‘the great statue’ or ‘corn’ at the beginning of the line ; I 
am in favour of the latter view. 

To the two scribes Amenemone and Harmin must be ascribed the part played by 
Dhutmose in the Turin corn-tax collecting papyrus, the scribe Penroy in P. Louvre 
Jiyi, 2, 9; 3, 2, and the scribe mentioned in the passage from the Miscellanies with 
which we started. Their duty was to control and register ( " sph-y the amounts 

delivered on the threshing-floors, and then to accompany them to the granary. That a 
part of the payment might be allowed to be postponed is suggested by the two original 
documents above mentioned, but it is surprising that a whole year’s contribution should 

^ Lit. ‘of’. ^ Or Nebwa^u, as written in 1 . 4. 

3 Here for once Glanville is at fault in his transcription; the superlinear addition reads — ^ n, not 

- n * — * • 

* Pf zo hry-ibf so too P. Wilbour ^ B 5, 15 ; Horns and Seth, 5,9. 12, etc., but in the last-named text vci 
as variant of vv 33 : 1 ‘island’. It remains to be determined whether the expression has the sense of peGoyeios as 
employed by Ptolemy. 

5 On the location of Nefrusi see above, p. 53, n. 3. The town called the Mound of Nahihu (Nahihu is 
a well-known personal name) is homonymous w ith one mentioned several times in the Wilbour papyrus, but 
they cannot possibly be identical. For similar cases see above, p. 45, n. 4. The town of P^ashpu in 1. 5 is 

^ Petrie, Tarkhan I and Memphis V, pi. 80, 11 . 22-3. In my translation (op. cit., p. 34) I have divided 
WTongly: one should read ‘Fields, 210 arouras in (m, not ]) the Northern province, and lands, 220 arouras 
of what, etc.’ 

^ See above, p. 20, n. 4. 



have been held over. Concerning the tvvo cultivators Glanville’s statement ‘Clearly they 
rented their land on condition that they (each) supplied 200 sacks of grain a year to the 
temple chest’ cannot be far wide of the mark, though ‘rented’ must remain a query- 
mark for the present. I take this opportunity of saying that for the moment I make no 
attempt to distinguish between rents, taxes, and simple returns of revenue by employees. 
Nor can it be stated with certainty whether the deliveries here made would have been 
described by the Egyptians as smw ‘harvest-taxes’. 

A final comment is needed on 1 . 4. It is uncertain whether \ means ‘what is with’ 
or ‘what is from’, i.e. whether the stable-master retained or paid out the amount here 
indicated as due from the cultivator Nebw'dt; ‘deficit with’ inP. Louvre 31 ji, 2,7 suggests 
the former. Possibly the situation underlying this entry is that depicted in Sallier I, 9, 
2-9 and often alluded to in the Wilbour papyrus, whence it appears that stable-masters 
who looked after the horses of Pharaoh had the right to lay claim to certain lands needed 
by them for grazing and for their personal requirements. 

§ 6. The Elephantine scandal (P. Turin 1887) 

In spite of its many lacunae and peculiarly difficult handwriting the Turin papyrus 
treated by Peet in this Journal, x, 116 ffi, and before him by Spiegelberg,^ is the most 
informative document we possess in regard to the internal administration of a Ramesside 
temple. It is a long indictment recounting the crimes committed at Elephantine by a 
priest of Khnum and certain accomplices of his. Several of the charges are concerned 
with the temple’s revenue in corn. It is very tantalizing that the explanatory intro- 
duction to the main passage has suffered more severely than almost any other part of the 
text. Enough of the story remains, however, and its details are sufficiently picturesque, 
to warrant its inclusion here, though it is only in the more conjectural portion that I 
have any serious modifications of Peet’s version to suggest. Publication of a transcript 
must be deferred for the moment. 

vs. 1,7 [Charge concerning the fact- that King Usima're'-miamun], the Great God, 

cultivator[s] seed^ so as to cause them to [bring ?]+ 700 sacks of corn^ to Khnum, Lord 

of Elephantine, here in the Southern province, and they used to be conveyed by water 

1,8 Elephantine. He (?) conveyed them by water and 

[delivered] them in full® in the granary of the god, and they were received from him^ 

^ ZAS XXIX, 73 fF. Spiegelberg apparently worked only from Ple>Te’s facsimile, and consequently did not 
succeed in rearranging the fragments in their proper order. This was, I believe, first done by myself in collating 
the papyrus for the Berlin dictionary some thirty-six years ago. 

^ Every separate charge had hitherto begun with the group ^ , perhaps shf r rather than smit r, and I have 
little doubt that the same was true of this exceptionally long paragraph. 

3 ‘seed^ not ‘grain’ as Peet has, but what seed is doing in this context is ver>^ obscure. 

As Cemy has shown, amounts containing the word for ‘hundred’ are preceded by the feminine article 
or possessives. For this reason my old reading which Peet followed me, cannot be correct, 

and the damaged group must conceal a verb. 

5 /CD probably in the general sense of ‘corn’, not ‘barley’, since later on the numbers are written in red. 

^ Peet misunderstood this ^ ^ 1 > which indeed contains the whole point of the passage. 

’ vv. vv ^ n ^ i ‘ seem to have been aware of the curious fact, first pointed out to me 

by Griffith and noted in my Inscription of Mes, p, i8, n. 38, that sp {ssp) followed by n means ‘receive from’> 


vs. I, 9 every year. Now in the year 28 of ' [Usima^re^-miamun, the Great God, sickness befell ?] 
this ship's captain and he died. And , who was prophet of the House of Khnum, 

I, 10 brought the merchant and . . .^ Khnemnakhte and appointed him [ship's captain] 

corn there in the Northern province, and he started conveying it by water.- But in year i 
of King Hekma^re^-setpenamun, the Great God, he made many defalcations with the 

I, II corn. 3 And this ship's captain ' 140 deben of the treasur}^(?) of 

Khnum, and so (?) the gold was not in the treasur}^ of the House of Khnum. And as for 
his (?) defalcations with the corn, it is^ not in the granary of Khnum, he having taken' 

I, 12 [it] Khnum. ^ 

1, 13 [Year i of King Hekmafre<^-setpenamun, the Great God, there ca]me to Elephantine 

by the hand of the ship's captain sacks. Deficit, 600. 

vs. 2, I Year 2 of King Hekma^re^-setpenamun, the Great God, ijo sacks. Deficit, 570. 

2, 2 Year 3 of King Hekma^re^-setpenamun, the Great God, 700 sacks; he brought none of 

it to the granaiy\ 

2, 3 Year 4 of King Hekma^re^^-setpenamun, the Great God, 700 sacks. There came in the 
ship of the Sacred Staffs by the hand of the skipper Pnakhtta 20 sacks. Deficit, 680. 

2, 4 Year 5 of King Hekma<^re<^-setpenamun, the Great God, 700 sacks. There came for the 
offerings of the Sacred Staves of Khnum 20 sacks. Deficit, 6S0. 

2, 5 Year 6 of King Hekma^re<-setpenamun, the Great God, 700 sacks. He did not bring it. 

2, 6 Year i of Pharaoh, 700 sacks. He did not bring it. 

2, 7 Year 2 of Pharaoh, 700 sacks. There came by the hand of the ship's captain Khnemnakhte 

186 sacks. Deficit, 514. 

2, 8 Year 3 of Pharaoh, 700 sacks. There came by the hand of this ship's captain 120 
sacks. Deficit, ^80, 

2, 9 Total, corn of the House of Khnum, Lord of Elephantine, in respect to which this 

2, ii^ ship's captain combined with the scribes, controllers, and cultivators of the House of 

Khnum and made defalcations with it, and they used it for their own purposes, 3004 sacks. 

From this interesting passage the god of the southernmost town of Egypt is seen to 
have derived an income in corn from fields in the Delta (vs. i, 10), and it agrees with 
what has been learnt from the documents previously studied that the persons upon 
whose integrity this revenue depended, though of course in the last resort the prophet 

mainly of succession, but also in other cases, as here and vs. i, 3 of this same papyrus; so too P. Brit, AIus, 
loioo^ 15, qu. below p. 108; referring to succession, Brit. Mus. 138 (Decree of Amenophis), 7; the Berlin 
dictionary' (iv, 530-3) overlooks this usage. The difficulty here is to discover to whom the pronoun ‘him’ refers. 
It might refer to the man mentioned as dying in vs. i, g, after whose death the defalcations began, but is the 
lacuna at the beginning of vs. i, 8 large enough to have introduced him? Otherwise we might have to take 
‘him’ as referring to Ramesses III (vs. 1,7); this would be extremely interesting, but seems unlikely. 

^ A second title apparently. From vs. 2, 7 it is clear that a Khnemnakhte was a ship’s captain, probably 
the same man as here. 

2 There can be recognized the traces of in the lacuna. It seems to be implied that in years 29 and 30, 

i.e. until the end of the reign of Ramesses III, the new ship’s captain delivered the corn in full. 

3 Is the merchant Khnemnakhte the subject? The entire passage is obscure in the extreme. 

^ I have ignored a very unintelligible superlinear addition. 

3 Apparently present tense. 

^ A short line. After a blank space there is what appears to be a later addition charging someone of having 
annexed people of the ship and having employed them, not for the service of the god, but for his own purposes. 

All amounts of com are in red from here onwards. 

® A ram-headed staff which was a sacred emblem of Khnum and object of a cult. See, too, vs. 2, 4. 

^ The line vs. 2, 10 is an intercalated remark, which appears to read thus: ‘As for Tjauemdikhnum (?), who 
used to take his com, he sits on top of the storehouse, and has no corn’. 



or prophets of the temple, were the cultivators, scribes, controllers {rwdw), and ship’s 
captains concerned in the transit from threshing-floor to granary. It is something of a 
surprise to find the annual return from these fields fixed at 700 sacks, since that return 
might have been expected to vary according to the satisfactory or unsatisfactory height 
of the year’s flood; still, such a fixed amount is implied in the assessment of the two 
cultivators of P. Brit. Mm. 1044'j at 200 sacks each in both of two successive years. The 
fixed amount of 402 sacks named in connexion wdth the temple of Esna in the Turin 
corn-tax collecting papyrus differed inasmuch as the amount was there paid hy\ not to, 
the temple. Perhaps, however, the underlying principle may have been the same, a 
definite number of sacks being demanded from the cultivators, and they making what 
profit they could out of the yield in excess of the assessment. But here I am going 
beyond my brief. Leaving these conjectures, let us note that the red writing of the 
figures denoting numbers of sacks of corn is the more likely to be significant since, 
with the solitary exception of the word ‘Total’ in vs. 2, 9 there is no other rubric in 
the entire papyrus. We can hardly doubt, therefore, that the temple’s revenue was 
reckoned in spelt. For the false addition in the total, see Feet’s explanation loc. cit., 126. 

Two more of the many accusations contained in the same papyrus have to do with 
corn. In the first of the two it is not clear against whom the charge is directed : 
vs. I, 4 [Charge concerning] their having opened one garner' of the House of Khnum which 
was under the seal of the controllers of the granary who do the controlling (rwd) for the 
House of Khnum, and they stole 180 sacks of corn from it. 

The second accusation is against the same ship’s captain as before, and is separated 
from the account of his previous defalcations perhaps only because the taxes extracted 
and purloined by him had been paid in commodities other than corn: 
vs. 2, 12 Charge concerning this ship’s captain of the House of Khnum having exacted produce^ 
vs. 2, 13 to the valued of 50 sacks, R 5 me, son of Penfanuke, and to the value of 50 sacks, ' Pwakhd, 
son of Ptjeumyeb, total 2 (persons), making 100 sacks, from year i of King Hekma're'- 
vs. 2, 14 setpenamun, the Great God, to i year 4 of Pharaoh, making 1000 sacks. He used it for his 
own purposes and brought none of it to the granary of Khnum. 

§ 7. The texts from P. Sallier IV verso 

By way of illustrating and amplifying some of the passages already studied, it mav 
be well to cast a glance at the agricultural texts on the verso of the famous Calendar of 
Lucky and Unlucky Days.'^ These texts appear to have attracted but little attention 
since the days when Goodwin and de Rouge commented on them, the former suggesting 
that they were genuine records of the reign of Merenptah,5 the latter regarding them 
simply as ‘le fruit d’une dictee ou comme des exercices traces par un ecolier’.^ For my 

• smmt, doubtless identical, despite the feminine gender and the twice written m, with the 

smyt commented upon above, p. 24, n. 2. 

2 Sd bdkwj see Harris I, 28, 5 ; 48, 2. 

^ here perhaps with the extended meaning ‘value*, may well be the word// or py which 

Cemy and I have found on a number of stones inscribed in hieratic with the meaning ‘w'eight*. Another 

possible meaning might be ‘amount*, a meaning apparently actually found in 
‘an amount of leather’ to make into sandals, Ostr. Petrie 37, rt. 2. 

+ See my Late-Egyptian Miscellanies^ pp. 93-6. ^ ZAS v, 57 ff. 


® ZAS VI, 129 ff. 


own part, I find it somewhat hard to believe in the latter view ; would any teacher have 
inflicted on his pupil the task of writing the day by day calendar in vs. 13, 13 a, and 
13 b ? On the other hand, it seems over-bold to employ these jottings for chronological 
purposes, as Goodwin sought to do. Happily our concern is with the contents, not 
with the historical value. 

The first text of any consequence is a letter: 

vs. 9, I The Royal scribe and steward of the Mansion of Millions of Years of King Binere^^- 
miamun in the House of Amun^ Harnakhte says to the deputy-superintendent Menthikhop- 
shef: This letter is brought to you that you may apply yourself to perform well and 
efficiently all tasks with which you have been charged. Let no fault be found with you. 
Further, the overseers of the granaivffiave been quarrelling with me over the corn which you 
put as load upon the boat of the granar\" of Pharaoh under the authority of the King’s scribe 
and overseer of the granary Neferronpe who (?) is the superior (?) of the deputy-com- 
mander of the army Mentehetef, they saying it is bad and unworthy of the work of 
vs. 9, 5 Pharaoh. So they said, and I went to see it and found it was really not at all good, ' Why 
do you act thus ? You ought to act after the wish of the controllers. But [do not] let them 
embitter you, for you know their way, that. . . . 

Here the letter breaks off in the middle of a sentence, giving place «fter an interval to 
some short jottings : 

vs. 10, I Year 3, fourth month of the Inundation season, day 4. Threshing-floor of the scribe 
Akhpe to the south of Metri:- 

Amount of work done in winnowing^ on the great platform of high ground, 545 sacks. 

Entering into the great magazine, 200+v sacks. What is in another and second magazine, 
124 ^f i^' Total 245 sacks. 

Year 3, fourth month of the Inundation season, day ii. Another and second platform. 
Entered into the magazine, J55. 

vs. 10, 5 Fourth month of the Inundation season, day 12 Another and [thijrd (?)+ 177. Total, 
[com?], 332. 

Two words for threshing-floor are here employed, both preserv^ed in Coptic, and the 
manner in which they occur makes it practically certain that dnw ^wooy was 

a large area containing several htizv g.!CiT ,5 which I have rendered ‘platform’, 

since the w^ord appears to be identical, except for its technical significance here and 
fairly frequently elsewhere, with the htitc ‘platform’ on which the god Min is depicted 
as standing, or the htiw ‘terrace’ used in reference to the slopes leading up to the 
Lebanon. The word dnw was found frequently in the Amiens papyrus, just as 
tnhr ‘magazine’ was encountered in the Turin corn-tax collecting papyrus. It will be 

* This is the funerary temple of Merenptah on the west side of Thebes, the remains of which were discovered 
by Petrie, see Porter & Moss, Topographical Bibliography^ i, 159* 

2 This otherwise unknown place is mentioned without a reference in Gauthier, Diet, geogr, iii, 64. 

3 Hh^ in Old Eg>^ptian hih>, in Coptic u|ojuj : especially in the compound pt'qycoy ‘win- 

nower’. See Wh. iii, 233, 17. 

^ In my edition I suggested that ‘[sec] ond’ was to be read. I now think that the third htiw or ‘platform’ must 
be meant. 

3 Wh. Ill, 349, 10 quotes only the extended Akhmimic form oefee^iT, but Crum, 629 a, cites examples of 
simple ^i€iT. 


observed that in vs. lo, 5 the number 177 is in black; unless this is a mere mistake, 
barley will have been meant. 

After a square of dots which Griffith explained as a device used in counting,^ and 
below this the drawing of a bull, there come the first words of a never written letter 
by the scribe 'Akhpe who was mentioned as owner of the threshing-floor. Then, after 
another rectangle of dots, follow the words 
vs. 12, I Copy of the flax of the ... -land 1000. Corn, 30 sacks. Balance, 12 2| sacks 2| sacks. 

These seem to be disconnected jottings. They are followed by the above-mentioned 
day by day calendar painfully recording every single day from the 26th day of the 
second month of the Inundation season in year 3 down to the 29th day of the third 
month. Only on five days are any events noted ; they are : 

Beginning of going down to thresh ^ ^ hi) on the great platform of high ground. 

Another and second platform of the high ground. 

The day when he went. 

The day when he came. 

They did not thresh in it. 

It is really superfluous to translate the few lines that remain, as they teach us nothing 

Those interested in details of threshing and winnowing in Egypt may be referred, 
for ancient times, to Klebs, Reliefs iind Malereien, i, 50-2 (O.K.); ii, 72-3 (M.K.); 
III, 12-15 (N.K.); for the Graeco-Roman period, to Schnebel, Landwirtschaft, 172-82; 
for modern times, to Wilkinson, Manners and Customs (ed. Birch), ii, 422 ffi ; and for 
winnowing, to Newberry in Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch, xxii, 153-4. These, of course, are 
only typical references, and many others, not far inferior, could be given. 

§ 8. The Griffith fragments ^ 

The first instalment of my Ramesside Administrative Documents had already been 
issued, and the commentary on the Wilbour papyrus was well on the way, when Gunn 
drew my attention to some papyrus fragments of considerable and unexpected relevance 
to both. These fragments had been purchased by Griffith at Luxor in 1887, and now 
belong to the Griffith Institute at Oxford. When they came into my hands as a loan 
from the Institute, they were mounted on strips of tracing paper two or three at a time, 
except a few having writing on the verso, which were between glass. All have now been 
re-mounted and placed between glass. It was soon seen that they belonged to a single 
papyrus, and after a certain number of joins had been made, there emerged an almost 
continuous piece 65 cm. in length and 18 cm. in height, to the right of which we must 
suppose once to have stood the fifty or more still unplaced fragments. The same very 
cursive hand was responsible for both recto and verso, but though the latter is the same 
way up as the former it is not its continuation, since the recto comes to an end about 
15 to 18 cm. from the inner margin. No account will here be given of the verso, for the 
good reason that, at least to some extent, it has defied decipherment up to the present. 

^ Proc, Soc, Bibl, Arch, xiv, 425-6. 

2 Permission to give the following account has been generously granted by the Committee of the Griffith 


Among the unplaced fragments are some showing widely spaced lines of uncial 
hieratic, the individual signs of which are about i cm. high. These fragments may have 
belonged to a sort of title-page. In the top line of one is found the royal name 
(®iliPP\\\'8. . . .8 Ratoesse-mi[amun], which we might be tempted to take as part of 
a dating. On the other hand, some of the signs of the papyrus, particularly display 
a form pointing at earliest to the end of the Twentieth Dynasty, and the royal nomen as 
given above does not appear to belong to any of the last three Ramessides. In the third 
line of the same fragment is a red tail doubtless to be understood as ‘[day] 10 -f-x’, and this 
is followed after a short lacuna by J, ‘by the priest of . . . ’. In the second line of a 
similar fragment we read ‘. . . Year 6, . . . month [of the . . . season]’. All this, however, 
helps but little, nor is much to be gained from the many other fragments showing text 
similar to that of the three last columns of the 7 -ecto, to which I now turn. Here, despite 
losses at both top and bottom, enough remains for it to be possible to form a shrewd 
idea of the text as a whole. This was divided into short paragraphs of which the top 
line, a heading, was written in good literary hieratic characters 7 mm. in height. The 
remaining lines of the paragraphs are in the minutest cursive hieratic I have ever seen. 
The size of this writing can be judged from the fact that in an exceptionally long 
paragraph of the penultimate column no less than 18 well-separated lines occupy a 
height of only 9 cm. For that column see the photograph pi. VIII. 

Publication of the full text must be postponed for the present, but as a sample I give 
one paragraph from the third and last of the relatively complete columns : 


^ C-Ji P . . .1,^^ 

V A [vO rc i 

□ ^ . 

ir 2 \ 


n n 
n I ' 

I I I [ n n n n [i i ’ 1] 

Domain of the House of Ma^e, the daughter of Re<, ‘Khnum the a[ged ?]h 

• Region of the high-lying fields of Penhasi (in ?) the house of the Crown Prince (in) this house, <o>' 
arouras, freshly cultivated land, 6 arouras 

• Region of the high-lying fields north of Inmut, 35 arouras 

• Region of the high- lying fields north of this place, 15 arouras. ■ total, all the freshly cultivated land, 
6 arouras, making 12 sacks. All the high-lying land, 40 arouras, making 8 32 sacks. : total, 8 4[4] sacks. 

The meaning of the paragraph is perfectly clear. It gives the position and area of 
three rather large pieces of land belonging to a temple of the Goddess of Truth, at the 
same time describing the nature of the soil. The fields are of two kinds, the first piece 
being nhb-land or land only recently brought under cultivation, and both the other 
pieces being kiyt-laxid, i.e. arable land of the best quality.^ Two totals then follow, the first 

* No space is left, but the distinction of kiyt-\^nd and nhb Aznd below indicates that the scribe meant to 
state that in this locality there were none of the former kind. 

^ For these terms see my commentary on the Wilbour papyrus. 


1 d • o *011 

, n ^ I I I 

X VV XT I Avwva ^ VV IX [! Id . ^vv,vw«v^M^vy^ d • n I I 

■ > © w IX ! id I i i 1 /wvwi\ il n [ I A IX 1 



summing up the amount of each kind of land, and stating the yield in corn of each, black 
being used for barley and red for spelt. The second total confines itself to giving the exact 
figures for the barley and the spelt. So far as can be seen, the arithmetic is accurate and 
red dots placed before the lines perhaps indicate that the data have been checked. 

Turning to details, the first word here, as in other paragraphs, is the technical term 
rmnyt encountered so often in the Amiens papyrus.^ ‘The House of Ma^e, daughter 
of Ref’ seems likely to be that ‘House of Mafe in the City’, where the 

Vizier heard some of the cases of the Theban tomb-robberies this is the more likely 
since, as we shall see, the papyrus gives great prominence to the god Khons, even 
naming one temple of his definitely known to have been at Thebes. The last words of 
the heading are, however, very troublesome. IV'Iy first thought, remembering how often 
in Ramesside times the solar disk is depicted containing a ram-headed god, was to take 
‘Khnum the a[ged.f]’ — the restoration is quite uncertain — as in apposition to ‘Ref’. 
This, however, is extremely unlikely, ‘daughter of Ref’ being an epitheton constans of 
Mafe, and complete in itself. The only plausible hypothesis is that ‘Khnum the 
a[ged.^]’ was the name of this particular domain, and not part of the name of the 
temple. Other paragraph-headings we shall meet with below tend to confirm this 
hypothesis. The first line after the heading is rather obscure, but ‘high land of Penhasi’ 
occurs again on a fragment, though not in conjunction with ‘[house of] the Crown 
Prince’ again found on another, there followed by ‘which is (in) the House of Mut’. 
This Mut may possibly be the goddess of Inmut mentioned in the second line after 
the heading. It is a strange coincidence that the Amiens papyrus and the Griffith 
fragments should both refer to that little-known town, which we saw (p. 45) to have 
lain in the neighbourhood of Kaw el-KebIr, and to have had Mut as its goddess. 

There is other evidence, however, that the fields with which the fragments deal 
were situated in or near the Xth nome of Upper Egj^pt, the Aphroditopolite or 
Antaeopolite. The best evidence comes from an eight-line paragraph too defective to 

quote in full. The heading is ‘Domain of the House of Khons the last 

divine name or epithet being utterly obscure, but possibly, as in a case already mentioned, 
forming part of the name of this particular domain. Three lines then all start with ‘Region 
of the Island of Khons in . . .’ and end with the area of the fields in those places. All the 
land mentioned in this paragraph appears to have been «^^-land, since 1. 5 begins with 
that word and ends by giving the very considerable amount of spelt (red) derived from 
the land in question. The remaining lines (11. 6-8) must be reproduced entire: 

9 n n n I i i. 

■ft i I ! ! - n n n I i i ■ 

9 ^ ^ * I * 

c? f n n n 1 i t 
i Of t j_. X vwv 

'y/c C') I I I I . 

! : I> ^ - 1 . ]> Hi I I I . 

Total, the tax-payers of Tjebu, [609!] sacks. Corn of the Tract 4 io66~ sacks. 

Total, 4, sacks, region^ [Given for] expenses, 120 sacks. Total, 4 sacks, region^ 

Brought to the Granary of the House of Amun, 2 |^ [Balance?] i J | 

I See above, p. 42. Peet, Tomb-Robberies, pi. 0, top, 1 . 9; pi. ii, top, 1 . i ; pL 17, top, I. 5. 

3 The meaning of this seemingly meaningless addition to the numbers escapes me entirely. 


The mention of the tax-payers of Tjebu, i.e. Kaw el-Kebir (above, pp. 44-5) is of 
interest, not only on account of the mention of Tjebu, but also because we here find 
the word U ‘to assess’ brought into relation with fields belonging to a temple of which 
the produce was delivered to the granary of Amun at Karnak. It seems certain from 
Anast. V, 27, 6‘ that the feminine is a collective noun meaning ‘tax-payers’, lit. 

‘(the) assessed’, and the same sense is suitable here and more obviously still in P. Chester 
Beatty V, rt. 7, 12-8, i,^ where the produce of these people, not corn, but copper, lead, 
wax, honey, etc. was paid into ‘the Treasury of the House of Amun’, this evidently 
on the same footing as ‘the Granary of the House of Amun’ in the present passage. The 
comparison of the three passages leaves no doubt about the situation presupposed. 
The temple of Khons was a Theban sanctuary possessing lands near Kaw el-KebIr, 
and these lands were tenanted, or at all events cultivated, by persons described as ‘the 
tax-payers of Tjebu’, who paid their quota of corn into the granary of Amen-Re< at 
Thebes; thence presumably, as was conjectured for the fields named in the Amiens 
papyrus (p. 41), the corn could be delivered to the priests of Khons on demand. Again 
as in the Amiens papyrus, as also in the Turin corn-tax collecting papyrus, a certain 
deduction was made for the expenses of transport ; there is not room, however, for the 
formula found in rt. 3, 16 of the Turin document, and here perhaps 

only [«y] hsw was written. 

Not all the corn of the three stretches of field, however, was derived from ‘the 
tax-payers of Tjebu’, for some of it is described as ‘corn of the Tract’. Kees has shown^ 
that, in Ramesside times and later, the word I have rendered ‘Tract’ (_A|Tj fern.) was 
practically synonymous with ‘nome’, and further evidence of this has been quoted 
above (p. 51) from the Wilbour papyrus. But Tjebu was itself a nome-capital, and it is 
difficult to see what is meant by saying that some of the corn of these fields came from 
‘the tax-payers of Tjebu’ and that some was ‘corn of the nome’. It is, however, at least 
interesting to note that, as in the Amiens papyrus, the corn from certain fields is 
presented as emanating from more than one source. 

Still further evidence is forthcoming that the fields of the Griffith fragments lay in 
the Xth Upper Egyptian nome. Strictly speaking, a local indication in one of the 
paragraph-headings is not such evidence, but it will be well first to dispose of one 
heading that has an indication of the kind. It reads; “ , ^ ^ 

‘The domain of the House of Menkheprure^ “Shopsi [restjing in He- 
kak” ’. Menkheprure' is \h& prenoitien of Tuthmosis IV, and failing testimony to the 
contrary one mav guess that the temple here mentioned was an unknown Theban 
chapel, not improbably at Karnak. Again, as in the two previously discussed headings, 
the last words seem likely to be the name of the provincial domain belonging to the 
chapel. Now both He-kak and its god Shopsi are known. In the consecutively arranged 
list of local deities at Vledinet Habu-^ the ibis-headed ‘Shopsi in the midst 

^ This passage will be translated in my commentary on the Wilbour papyrus. 

2 In my text to that passage, p. 48, I translated ‘the company of tax-gatherers', not having realized that in 
the Anast, V passage H must have passive sense. 3 ZAS uxxn, 46-9. 

^ Published by Daressy, Rec, Trav, xvn, 118 ff. He is wrong, howev^er, as I have confirmed from my own 
copy of the original, in speaking of Shopsi as ‘a tete de belier’. He is well known as closely associated with 



of He-kak’ comes fifth after the deities of Akhmim and fifth before those of Antaeopolis, 
and in the Golenischeff Onomasticon (5, 2) He-kak follows Djat-ruhe (above, 

p. 45) immediately, and is removed only by two towns from Tjebu farther north. 
There can thus be but little doubt that He-kak lay in the Xth Upper Egyptian nome. 
Now lower down in the paragraph — it is the long paragraph at the bottom of pi. VIII — 
mention is made of fields north of He-kak and east of He-kak. So too we find ‘north of 
He-kak’ on a fragment that is unplaced, and on another there are no less than three 
mentions of ‘the House of Shopsi’. There can thus be no shadow of 

doubt concerning the part of Egypt with which the Griffith fragments are concerned. 

Consideration of the other place-names in the Griffith fragments must be deferred 
until the text can be completely published, but it comes within the scope of this article 
to enumerate the various paragraph-headings there found, since each of these speaks 
of a landlord institution possessing fields in the Xth nome and exacting taxes or rents 

Paragraph-headings or parts thereof visible on unplaced fragments and consequently 
belonging to columns lost to the right of the large continuous strip : 

Domain of the House of Khons [ . . .] youth.' ) 

• r.^1 TT ^ ' 1 On the same pair of fragments. 

Domain oi tne House or Khons the Contriver, j 

Whether or no the former of these two ‘Houses of Khons’ is the larger temple of 
that name at Thebes (see further below), the latter is not. The temple of Khons 
the Contriver (['^]^^(pP<£.(jrM-^) was in the eastern part of the Karnak complex 
of buildings, and thence came the celebrated stela of the Healing of the daughter 
of the Prince of Bakhtan.^ 

[Domain of him]self(.?) Amun 

[Domain of] the iVIansion of Hekmane'(?) 

If the royal name is rightly read, this heading probably refers to the funerary temple 
of Ramesses IV on the west of Thebes, for which see Robichon and Varille, in Revue 
d’Egyptologie, iii, 99-102. 

[Domain of the House of] Atum 

Since in the following lines detailing the fields the topographical indication twice ends 
with ‘House of Re <^’,3 it seems likely that the temple owning the fields was in 

Heliopolis, and we might even have found in the last line of the paragraph ‘Brought 
to the Granary^ of Heliopolis’. 

founded anew by the prophet 

Thoth at Ashmunen, and indeed in the Medinet Habu list itself he appears, but human-headed, between Thoth 
and Nehem-<awaye among the deities of that place. With regard to Daressy’s identification with El-Agagiyah, 
about 20 km. north-west of Sohag, I will only say that I do not find that name on the Survey i : 50,000 map. 


2 Porter & Moss, op. cit.y i\, For this god, in Greek Xea-maixi’S, see ZAS LViii, 156-7. 

2 Note that such an addition to the topographical indication is not uncommon ; w e have already come across 
Hhis house^ ‘House of Mut\ and ‘House of Shopsi’ similarly used. 

* ^ w ' ™1S 1!^ • S '% heading thus seems to have mentioned the 

temple of a goddess. 

Plate VIII 


A » 



1-^ - 




^. 12 ^ 


Sca/^ I : I 

penultimate column 



Col. x+i (ante-penultimate): 


This heading mentioned a Theban chapel, since the last line of the paragraph reads 
Brought to the Granary of the House [of Amun] . . .’, see above, p. 66. The same entry, 
with ‘Amun’ preserved, occurs higher up in this column as last line to a paragraph that 
has completely lost its heading. 

Domain of the House of Khons ‘ g>'bw-ib’. 

See above, p. 66, where the last three lines of the paragraph are discussed. If the 
name of the temple ended with ‘Khons’, this, as well as several other mentions of the 
House of Khons above and below, may refer to the great Theban temple to the south- 
west of the great Karnak complex. 

[Domain of the House of Khjons ‘who was (?) [deputy ?] of the great and mighty sun’s disk which 
is to the right of Khons’.' 



Col. x-r2 (penultimate, see pi. VHI): 

[Domjain of the Portable Shrine 

For kniw ‘portable shrine’ see above, p. 29. The other holy places so called are all, so 
far as our information goes, Theban. 

Domain of the iMansion of Nebmatre' ‘Amun . . . brought by Amun himself’.^ 

The word ‘Mansion’ ( 3 ,^) points to a funerary temple, see JEA xxvi, 127. This 
heading probably refers to the great destroyed temple behind the vocal Memnon, but 
it should be remembered that Amenophis HI also possessed a cenotaph at Memphis 
called a ‘Mansion’. ^ The temple named in the paragraph-heading is mentioned again 
on an unplaced fragment. 

Domain of the House of the Divine x\doratress of Amun ‘. . . his scribe’. 

‘. . . his scribe’ is veiy^ strange ; I can only suggest that it is part of the name of the 
domain. The House of the Divine Adoratress {sit venia verho) is often mentioned in 
the tomb-robberies papyri, where various officials and employees belonging to it are 
named. For the Queens who bore this title see Lefebvre, Histoire des grands pretres, 
pp. 35-9, and more recently Sander-Hansen, Das Gotteszveib des Amun, in Kong. Danske 
Videnskab. Selskab, Hist.-filol. Skrifter, 1940. 

Domain of the House of Menkheprure' ‘Shopsi [restjing in He-kak’. 

See above, p. 67, for this foundation of Tuthmosis IV . 

Col. x + 3 (last of the recto): 

Do[main of the Hous]e of Ptah, the Great, South of His Wall [. . . ?]. 

‘South of His Wall’ was clearly read by me, but has now crumbled to dust. Occurring 

i V 1\ © 1 „ 

L/MMMv 11 XL i*- TV 1 , LX X J ^ . vx w , . L ^ L J I V. 1 

The tentative restoration [idnzv] is suggested by the epithet of Khons ‘deputy of the disk’ quoted by Sethe, 
Amun und die acht Urgotter von Hermopolis, Abh. Berlin, § 242. 

2 The last words ^ i are certain, but were unfortunately damaged in re-mounting. 

^ See Petrie, Tarkhan I and Memphis K, pi. 79> 



in this position, perhaps the Theban temple of Ptah published by Legrain in Ann. 
Serv. in is meant; the title of Ptah there is ‘South of His Wall, in Thebes’, e.g. op. cit., 
109, but I find no trace at Thebes of the epithet ‘the Great’, which seems confined 
to IMemphis. In view of what was said above about a ‘House of Atum’, we cannot 
be certain that the great Memphite temple was not intended. 

Domain of the House of Ala'e, the Daughter of Re^, ‘Khnum the a[ged ?]’. 

See above, p. 65. 

At the bottom of the last column we find in the same larger writing of the paragraph- 
headings ; 

" Badly made; this name once again, Ranke, 271, 1 1. Deleted signs after a blank space. 

After this an unknown number of lines lost. 

The second. The (subsidiar}') temples.’ 

The House of Osiris, Lord of Abydos, inspected by the scribe Khensehenutenib, sacks (erased) 
sacks 10 40 ... . (?) 

The House of Onuris Shu, [son of Ret],^ inspected by ditto. 

The House of Alin, Horus, and [Isijs,^ the gods lords of Ipu, inspected by . . . 

The purpose of this section is quite obscure, the more so since the mention of corn 
which might have been appointed for delivery to the temples of the list is confined to 
its first entry. In the heading it is unknown what feminine substantive is to be supplied 
in thought after The second — could it be dnit ‘list’ ? It is also uncertain whether ‘the 
temples’ should be regarded as a second heading, as I have taken it, or whether it is a 
genitive after what precedes. The one thing that is clear is that here stood a list of 
provincial temples similar to that of Harris 6i, a, 3 ff., arranged in geographical 
order from south to north; the three lines preserv^ed mention the main temples of 
(i) Abydos, (2) Thinis, and (3) Akhmim. 

§ 9. The Louvre leather fragments 

The last new document to be adduced is one of which, owing to present circum- 
stances, my final collation is not accessible to me. At the best of times it would be a 
most incomplete and unsatisfactory document, raising far more problems than it 
solves. And yet it is desirable not to disregard it completely. My attention was drawn 
to this recent acquisition of the Louvre by Cerny, and the fragmentary and brittle roll 
w'as opened and mounted by Ibscher at the same time as he dealt with the Amiens 
papyrus. For opportunity to study under the best auspices these blackened and dis- 

^ R-pr seems sometimes to imply a temple of secondary" rank or a provincial temple. 

^ For the restoration, cf. Harris^ 57, ii. 12, in conjunction with ibid.., 61, a, 3. 4. 

3 See ibid., 61, a, 12. 



jointed scraps of leather I am indebted to the same two friends and colleagues who 
facilitated my work on the Amiens manuscript, namely M. Boreux and M. Vandier. 

The date is probably Nineteenth Dynasty, and the writing is easy to read wherever well 
preserved. Fragments A and B are possibly to be placed side by side, with a continuous 
heading in the top line. After a date ‘Year 2, third month of the Summer season . . .’ 
there is a lacuna of some size, followed by j n 

‘measurement (?)... midday (.') through the House of Amun’. Below the top line the 
text divides into two columns, which I call cols, a and b. I give my imperfect and 
unrevised copv of col. a, 11. 1-4 for the benefit of those who can make anything of them: 

(■) (2) 

(3) ^'=n/.L:(4) if; L. I gives the names 

of three scribes. L. 2, ‘measurement in the . . . through the House of Amun’. L. 3, ‘farm- 
land of the farmers ( ?) of Khons ( ?), 12 ( ?) arouras’. If we could but understand 1 . 4, and 
particularly its initial verb in, probably the secret of the entire document would be revealed . 
A purely literal translation seems to give : ‘brought, 10 arouras at ( ?) 12 sacks, makes 150 
sacks (?)’; this, however, is a piece of arithmetic which does not carry conviction. For 
‘brought’ we might conceivably substitute ‘bought’, since in sometimes has that meaning. 

What lends importance to the document is not, of course, this mysterious exordium, 
but the many entries which follow. They are of the stereotyped form : ‘Title -|- name X, 
son of name Y, a; arouras ; with (or “at” .?) if sacks’, and the peculiar point about 

them is that, whatever the amount of land — it is always a small plot, never exceeding 3 
arouras, i.e. about 2 acres — the number of sacks remains constant at if. Those who 
subsequently study the Wilbour papyrus will not fail to note the strong similarity to the 
entries in what I shall call the apportioning paragraphs. There we continually find the 
names of small-holders followed by three sets of figures, one in black, and two in red, 
the last following the sign ipt ‘ozp^-measure’, hardly simply ‘corn’, and the last 
figures, as here, are always if. It can be proved that the preceding figures refer to 
‘arouras’, and the most plausible explanation is that the small-holder in question 
cultivated x arouras, but had to pay tax only on y arouras, which he did at the standard 
rate of if oipe (or sacks — there lies a knotty problem !) per aroura. Is it possible to 
interpret the Louvre fragments in a similar manner ? The resemblance is incontestably 
great, so great that a connexion seems undeniable. But here I must leave the question, 
only mentioning the fact that the small-holders of the Louvre fragments are soldiers 
(wrw), coppersmiths {hmty), inlayers of faience (.") (nsdy), bringers of wood (J„^^), 
withdrawers of rations^ other callings the nature of which is 

lost in lacunae. Lastly, two sample lines may be quoted by way of illustration : 

(1. 5) 

f ' -A , 
X -iJ-A TT 1 


(i, a, 6) 

The soldier Pentwere, son of Neferronpe, J 1 ( = |) aroura, at (?) i| sacks. 

The soldier Setmose, son of Huy, i aroura, at (?) i| sacks. 

* Left in pencil in my copy, and therefore doubtful. ^ n ihwty doubtful. 

^ I have not met with this strange occupational name elsewhere. 

* The upper sign represents rmn, the i -aroura. 



§ 10. The Harris papyrus 

It may perhaps be wondered why this article has paid so little attention to the 
great Harris papyrus, well-known to be the principal source of our knowledge con- 
cerning temple-property, a topic inseparable from the subjects that have been occu- 
pying us here. The reasons are, firstly that it seemed more useful to bring new material 
to bear upon the matter, and secondly that any adequate discussion of the papyrus 
would have demanded far more space than could be allotted to it. As an afterthought, 
however, I have decided to give some brief indication of the present position of 
Egyptological opinion in regard to this fundamental document. Until five years ago 
scholars had seemingly settled down to a comfortable belief in the conclusions reached 
almost simultaneously by Breasted^ and Erman- some thirty years earlier. In 1936, 
however, appeared a monograph^ which fell like a bombshell in the midst of our 
preconceived notions. Breasted and Erman had maintained that, though the Harris 
papyrus professes to record only the benefactions of Ramesses HI to the temples 
of the three great Capitals, and to those of the provinces, in reality his assumed gifts 
included all the temples’ previous possessions, the king having ‘confirmed’ the latter 
and having thereby established his claim to be regarded as the donor. Schaedel’s essay, 
on the contrary, strongly reasserted the earlier view that the papyrus is concerned 
with nothing but real additions to the temple estates made by Ramesses III. But if 
this is true, then obviously the document cannot be used, as Breasted and Erman 
used it, to estimate the total wealth of the priesthood. I desire to put on record my 
conviction that Schaedel has completely proved his main contention; indeed, retro- 
spectively, it is difficult to conceive how the opposite view can have prevailed so long. 
In one vital particular, however, Schaedel has failed to shake himself free from a 
remarkable error shared by his predecessors. Each of the main divisions of the papyrus 
contains a section devoted to the yearly contributions made to the temples by their 
dependants during the thirty-one years of the king’s reign. The essential part of these 
sections consists of separate items (metals, materials, animals, &c.) accompanied by 
figures stating the amounts or numbers, and this essential part is preceded in four 
out of the five cases'^ by an introductory heading that differs slightly in form in each 
of the four. The following is a translation of the fullest of these headings, that prefixed 
to the items in the division of the papyrus devoted to Thebes (12, a, 1-5): 

Goods, dues and produce of people and all dependants of the Mansion of King Usima<ref- 
miamun in the House of Amun^ in the southern and northern provinces under the authority of 
officials : 

of the House of Usima're'-miamun in the House of Amun^ in the City; 

of the House of Ra'messe-Hek-On in the House of Amun 

* Ancient Records^ IV, §§ 151-181. 

^ Zur Erkldrung des Papyrus Harris, in Sitzungsb. Berlin, 1903, 456 ff. 

3 H. D. Schaedel, Die Listen des grossen Papyrus Harris, being Heft 6 of the Leipziger Agyptologische 

^ In the fifth case the heading is dispensed with, see Breasted, op. cit., p. 185, n. d. 

5 i.e. the great temple of Medinet Habu. 

^ i.e. the temple of Ramesses III near the temple of Mut, see Schaedel, op. cit., 26-9. 

7 i.e. the small Kamak temple, op. cit., 23-4. 


of the Mansion of Ra'messe-Hek-On United-in-joy in the House of Amun' belonging to Ope; 
of the House of Ra^messe-Hek-On in the House of Khons 
and of the 5 herds of cattle which are kept (?) for this house 
whicM King Usima'ref-miamun, the Great God, placed as a gift in their treasuries, magazines, 
and granaries as their^ yearly contributions. 

Erman’s treatment of these sections is most peculiar. Scrutinizing the figures attached 
to the various items, he finds them high. He therefore jumps to the conclusion that 
they represent the total contributions received in the course of the entire reign, and 
accordingly divides them by thirty-one in order to ascertain the average yearly de- 
liveries. The figures thus obtained are now, however, declared to be too low, and 
consequently we find Erman voicing the conjecture that they were not the full annual 
deliveries received from this source, but only ‘subsidiary taxes’ (‘nebensachliche 
Steuern’). It suffices thus to summarize this mode of argumentation in order to 
detect its weaknesses. As a matter of fact, the best of arguments can be produced to 
show that the figures state the annual deliveries, not those of the entire reign. Nor 
are the figures really high. It is impossible to demonstrate my point here, but I hope 
to do so elsewhere. In the meantime, the mere statement of the results of my investi- 
gation may perhaps be of some service. 

§ 11, Conclusion 

Those readers who have bravely worked their way through this lengthy article will 
doubtless feel the lack of a unifying thought, of a steadily developing argument running 
through the whole. This apparent defect lay in my intention, and will perhaps come 
to be viewed as a virtue if my purpose is rightly understood. That purpose was to 
present some little-known material bearing on a circumscribed topic, to treat each item 
separately on its own merits, and so to leave other scholars to form unbiassed opinions. 
If any synthesis of mine ever sees the light, it will be in the Text volume to the Wilbour 

^ i.e. a destroyed chapel of Ramesses III in Luxor, op. cit., 24-6. 

2 i.e. the temple of Khons in Kamak, as all have recognized. 

3 i.e. the entire estate of Amen-Re^, King of the Gods. 

+ The relative pronoun refers to the ‘goods, dues and produce’, mentioned at the beginning. 

5 ‘Their’ refers to the people and dependants mentioned in the first line. 

( 74 ) 




Many Middle Kingdom business documents and letters still remain to be published. 
The largest collection is in Berlin, but many valuable fragments are, or were, preserved 
in University College, London. Before the war I began a study of those available to me. 
Professor Gunn kindly gave me permission to publish the papyri discovered at Harageh 
by the British School of Archaeology in Egypt,' and catalogued by him in Engelbach 
and Gunn, Harageh (1923), 32-3. Most of these are mere fragments. ^ But one of them, 
a page from the diary of a scribe of the revenue department, is of sufficient interest to 
be published separately here.^ The palaeography closely resembles that of the papyri 
from El-Lahun, a few miles away, and must be of the same period, i.e. the very end of 
the Twelfth or beginning of the Thirteenth Dynasty. The papyrus is badly riddled with 
worm-holes, but repetitions and useful traces have made it possible to restore most of 
the lacunae with certainty. Photograph and transcription are given in pis. IX, IX A. 

In the following translation I have retained the line arrangement of the original. The 
scribe has written vertically the beginning of 1. 12, to show that it is to be read after 
each of lines 7-1 1 , as we use a bracket.^ The same device is used again in 1 . 26. At the 
beginning of a line a blank space serves as the equivalent of ditto-marks. Red signs are 
underlined in the transcription, and rendered by small capitals in the translation. 



The clerk of land 

„ „ „ Seneb 

The envoy of the steward Hor[i] 

The stretcher of the cord Satpehu 

The holder of the cords Ibi 

Year 2, Second month of Inundation, day 15^ 

„ „ „ „ DAY 16 

„ „ „ „ DAY 17 1 

„ „ „ „ DAY 18 

„ ,, „ „ DAY 19; 

(12) Spent in measuring (?) with the clerks 
of land of the Southern District. 

’ They were found in the surface rubbish and in some of the tombs during excavations on the Gebel 
Abusir, in the winter of 1913-14. 

2 It is hoped that one day these may be included in a volume with the University College fragments to form 
a ^Kahtm Papyri IP. 

3 It has been numbered 3 by Prof. Gunn. Its present measurements are 26 X 23 cm. There are a few small 
traces of signs belonging to the previous page; opposite 1 . 1 1 the personal name Ibi occurring in 11 . 6, 21 is 
perhaps to be read. The verso is blank. My wife has kindly autographed pi. ix for me. 

^ Another example is Kah. Pap,y pi. 9, where nmhyt nt hrtyw-ntr w^rt nihtt is to be read after 11 . 4 ~ 7 * 

Year 2, Second month of Inundation, day 20. 

Spent assessing for him (?) the dues'* in the Office of Land of the Northern District, [and] 

15 Registering* in the o[ffice of] the Treasurer of the King and Overseer of land of the 
Northern District Redynyptah.*' 

List of the names of the clerks of land who arrived for the registration on this 


The clerk of the Tema and custodian of the regulations,^ paentyney 
The clerk of land Senebteyfey 

,, ,, ,, Seneb 

20 [The envoy] of the steward Hori 

The holder of the cord Ibi 
The stretcher of the cords Satpehu 

Year 2, Second month of Inundation, day 21 ] ... r , ^ r • r 1 • 1 1 

’ I (20) Spent [assessing lor him [t)\ the dues 

” ” ” ” DAY 22 in the Office of Land 

25 It tt tt DAY 23 J 


(a) Lit. ‘writing for him the exaction of dues’. Wb. refers to only one example of 
hbi inw before the Ptolemaic period, namely in the ‘Duties of the Vizier’ [Urk. iv, 
1114, 13), ‘It is he (the Vizier) who deals with the exaction 

of the dues of the temples (and to him the Great Council report their taxes)’. In the 
Graeco-Roman period the expression is surprisingly frequent, but the examples are all 
of a similar character and it will be sufficient to quote one^ from a speech of Nephthys 
to the King, it-k Kmt, hh-k DM, hb-k inw m izvntyw, ‘Thou dost hold Egypt, thou dost 
rule the Deserts, thou dost exact tribute from the Troglodytes’, Chassinat, Temple 
d’Edfou, I, 188 {Mem. x). It is difficult to see why the Wb. (iii, 252), regards 
the hbi in hbi inw as a separate verb from hbi {ibid. 251) ‘to diminish’, ‘subtract’. The 
sense of ‘exacting (dues)’ is clearly derived from the primary meaning ‘to subtract’. 
In our case hb must be a noun and not the infinitive, which would be hbt. 

{b) The word snhy is mostly used of registering people, and the examination of 
tenants or owners of lands may be meant here. The snhy is again associated with the 
land-survey and taxation on a fragment of a journal from El-Lahun {Kah. Pap., pi. 23, 
12 ff.), f = ‘What was paid at the 

registration, ist month of Summer, day 22. Amount to-day paid, 50. Arrears, 5’. The 
next entry (day 23) gives the division {psU) of certain lands between the towns of 
Hetep-senwosret and Kha^-senwosret. 

{c) We have here what seems to be an early example of a construction extremely 
frequent in L.E. When writing certain titles accompanying a man’s name the Ramesside 
scribe regularly inserted the personal name within the title. Thus the ‘mayor of the 
City Psiur’ was written i-e. ‘The mayor Psiur of the City’. So here 

the name Redynyptah is inserted between ‘overseer of land’ and ‘of the Northern 
District’. Similar M.K. examples are Kah. Pap., pi. 9, ii; 13, 12. 

* For further examples see Wb.^ Belegstellen, i, 91 (16). 

2 snhy was incorrectly read by Griffith. The ligature of ^ has a very similar form in the same w^ord op. cit., 
Pb 14, 5 - 



{d) Snhh. I am unable to account for this strange geminating form of snhy. 

{e) The □ is broken, but hp is the only word which can be read. I know of no other 
example of this title iry hp ‘custodian of the regulations’, but one may compare ° , 
‘overseer of the regulations’, Lange-Schafer, Grab- ii. Denksteine d. Mittleren Reichs 
(CCG), III, 46. 

The scribe has not recorded in this journal his private affairs, nor has he noted down 
the amounts of taxation which he assessed ; he has merely made brief entries of how he 
spent his business hours and the names of those who worked with him. It is likely 
enough that officials who travelled on Government business were required to make a 
return to the central office of how they spent their time. 

Perhaps the most interesting of our scribe’s colleagues are the ‘stretcher of the 
cord(s)’ and ‘holder of the cord(s)’. Both these titles are new to us, but the figures of 

these men are well known from a number of Eighteenth Dynasty tombs,' where they 
are seen accompanied by officials and scribes, measuring the standing corn (fig. i).- 
Despite the differences in date^ it seems fairly safe to assume that among the other 
officials in the scene are to be found ‘Two clerks of land’, ‘The envoy of the steward’, 
and ‘The clerk of the Tema, and custodian of the regulations’. Can this latter person 
be the aged man who holds the zc/^-sceptre and swears that the boundary stone is in 
its right place ? 

In conclusion I should like to touch upon a point of chronology. In a letter dated 
in year 7 of Sesostris IIL it is recorded that day 16, fourth month of Winter (prt) 
coincided with the rising of Sothis i.e. about July 19th of the Julian Calendar. On 
palaeographical grounds our papyrus must be judged to be of about the same date or a 
little later. The first date mentioned in the journal, second month of Inundation, day 
15, will, therefore, have fallen on about January 19, or earlier. I leave it to others to 
judge whether this would be a suitable time of year for measuring cornfields for 

* Photographs of three of these are given in S. Berger’s article A Note on some Scenes of Land-measurement, 
JEA XX, 54 ff. The scene also occurs in the tomb of Amenhotpesase (No. 75), Davies, The Tombs of Two 
Officials, pi. 10; in Tomb No. 86 (Davies, The Tomb of Menkheperrasonb, etc., pis. 17, 18); and in Tomb 
No. 297 (unpublished). 

^ From the Tomb of Djeserkara'sonb (No. 38), after Wreszinski, Atlas, pi. ii. 

3 In these Theban paintings the measuring-cord was originally adorned with the ram’s head of Amun ; this 
would naturally not have been the custom in the Middle Kingdom. 

+ ZAS XXXVII, 99. 

Plate IX 

Scale 3 : 4 


Plate IX a 

^T72 ^±m® 


tey ?|90, 


1 o BdzdO 

3, 3,(4.‘^J^tx»^<^«^ffyvii^tb3uX_ 

3^ I5®“ pTryWr^j-n^rtt;^ 3^ ifo ^ arv O- Srruitt p4:ec£. ncur 






While working on the funerary stelae of the Middle Kingdom it occurred to me that 
an analysis of the htp-di-nsw formula might help to date these monuments. I therefore 
collected as many dated examples of the formula as possible, 12 1 in number, and 
grouped them in periods. Having divided each formula into its component parts, 
e.g. Osiris, Nb Ddzc, etc., I worked out the frequency of occurrence of each part at 
various periods throughout the Middle Kingdom. The results were embodied in the 
percentage tables which appear below. 

The first fact emerging was that the htp-di-nsw changed continuously through- 
out the Middle Kingdom. 

The second fact was that it was possible to distinguish between formulae of the Eleventh 
and Twelfth Dynasties; and further, between those of the early and late Tzcelfth Dynasty. 

Of the formulae used, 14 are dated to the Eleventh Dynasty; 35 to the reign of 
Sesostris I; 21 to that of Ammenemes II; 10 to Sesostris III; 26 to Ammenemes III; 
7 to Ammenemes IV ; and 5 to the Thirteenth Dynasty. Only one example is dated 
to the sole reign of Ammenemes I; and two to that of Sesostris II. These two reigns 
have therefore been omitted from the tables of analysis. 

In these tables, where two numbers occur in the same square, the left hand gives the 
number of formulae bearing the section of the formula in question, the right hand the 

The period marked ‘Later’ represents the reign of Ammenemes IV and the Thir- 
teenth Dynasty. The Thirteenth Dynasty is the latest limit for Middle Kingdom 
htp-di-nsw formulae because in the next dynasty the formula appears to take its New 
Kingdom form, i.e. di-htp-nszv, see JEA xxv, 34. 

A bracket round a number indicates that the number is insufficient basis for a 

References and a list of formulae, classified according to period, will be found at 
the end of the article. 

I. Change in the Grammatical Structure of the Foraiula 

The grammatical structure of the formula changes in one respect during the Middle 
Kingdom. In the Eleventh Dynasty prt-hrzc ‘an invocation’ is used; while in the 
Twelfth Dynasty dif prt-hrzc ‘that he may give an invocation’ is preferred. Thus the 
formula must have Ken re-interpreted in the Twelfth Dynasty. 

78 C. J. C. BENNETT 

In the table of analysis below the later form can be seen ousting the earlier. 



di'f prt-hrw 


Xlth Dynasty . 






Sesostris I . . . 

1 1 





Ammenemes II 






Sesostris III . 






Ammenemes III . . i 












2. Change in the Writing of the Name of Osiris 
Throughout the Middle Kingdom changes occur in the orthography of certain 
words in the formula. Thus in the Eleventh Dynasty, and often in the early Twelfth 
Dynasty, the name of Osiris is written with the determinative later the deter- 
minative is usually dropped. Note that instead of 5^ often appears in the Eleventh 

Dynasty and early Twelfth Dynasty. The writing does not occur in these formulae 

before the reign of Sesostris III. 


1 With 

\ determinative 




Xlth Dynasty . 

• ' 9 





Sesostris I 

* ! 13 





Ammenemes II 

• ' 7 





Sesostris III 






Ammenemes III 












3. The Title Hnty Imntyw 

As in the name of Osiris, the determinative ^ of Hnty Imntyw occurs early in the 
hliddle Kingdom and drops out later. The frequency of the title at each period is 
noted in the first column of the table, the change in the orthography in the second 
and third columns. 


The title as 
a whole 

! With 





Xlth Dynasty . 



5 55 

4 45 


Sesostris I 

. 1 14 


II 79 

3 21 


Ammenemes 1 1 



3 (60) 

2 (40) i 


Sesostris III . 



0 (0) 

, 5 (100) ; 


Ammenemes III 



0 0 

7 100 ' 





0 (0) 

I (100) 


4. The Title Nb Ddw 

This title occurs in all the Eleventh-Dynasty Osiris formulae, but shows a steady 
decline throughout the Twelfth Dynasty. The writing f is usual until the time 
of Sesostris III. 5^^® and are also early forms, occurring in the Eleventh 

Dynasty and in the reign of Sesostris I. flf^® is a later form and occurs most 


frequently under Ammenemes HI, when four formulae out of six have it. Its earliest 
appearance is in the reign of Sesostris 1 . 


Nb Ddw 


Xlth Dynasty . 




Sesostris I . . . 




Ammenemes II 




Sesostris III 




Ammenemes III 




Later . . . . : 




5. ‘The Great God’ 

The words T| ‘the Great God’ after the name of Osiris rarely occur until the Twelfth 



'Great God' 


Xlth Dynasty . 

I 10 


Sesostris I 

22 81 


Ammenemes II 

. ; 10 63 


Sesostris III 

I 13 


Ammenemes III 

12 66 



2 33 


6. Designation of the Deceased 

In the Eleventh Dynasty and 

usually in the reign 

of Sesostris I the deceased is 

designated etc. ‘honoured one’. By the time of Ammenemes II U — is 

placed in front making U ‘the spirit of the honoured one’. Finally, in the 

reign of Sesostris III, the older designation drops out leaving U — ‘the spirit of’. Thus 
the fact that ‘honoured one’, originally an earthly title, changed to ‘the spirit of’ indi- 

cates a radical change in religious belief at this time. 

The dead man was no longer 

conceived as an ‘honoured’ man. 

but as a spirit. 


imihw kf n imihzo 

kf n Total 

Xlth Dynasty. 

12 100 0 0 

00 12 

Sesostris I . • . 

16 53 10 33 

4 13 30 

Ammenemes II 

2 II 12 66 

4 22 i8 

Sesostris III . 

00 2 29 

5 71 7 

Ammenemes III 

00 7 28 

18 72 25 

Later .... 

00 00 

10 100 10 

7. The Offering-List in the Formula 

The usual offerings mentioned 

in the formula in the Eleventh Dynasty are bread. 

beer, oxen, fowl, alabaster, and linen. In the Twelfth Dynasty incense and oil are 

often added. 


Incense and oil 


Xlth Dynasty . 

0 0 


Sesostris I 

7 25 


Ammenemes II 



Sesostris III . 

6 86 


Ammenemes III 

9 64 



2 25 




8. The Phrase ‘On which the God lives’ 

The phrase ‘on which the god lives’, which occurs in the formula after the 

list of offerings, appears first under Sesostris I. Later it is often combined with didit 
pt km/t U innt Hrpy ‘which the sky gives, the earth fashions, and the Nile brings’. 


which the 

1 god lives^ 


Xlth Dynasty . 

-I 00 


Sesostris I 

1 2 40 


Ammenemes II 

6 29 


Sesostris III . 

. ' 2 25 


Ammenemes III 

• ! 9 43 



- ; 2 29 ; 


9. Divine Names 

Of the gods invoked in the htp-di-nsw formula, Osiris and Anubis share the honours 
in the Eleventh Dynasty. But in the Twelfth Dynasty Osiris is far and away the most 
popular, often becoming Ptah-Soker-Osiris in formulae of the reign of Ammenemes III 
and later. Anubis loses favour and is replaced in many cases by Wepwawet. The latter 
appears most often in the reign of Sesostris III. Among the other gods, Ptah, Hathor, 
and Khnum and Heket, the tw^o gods of resurrection, are invoked most often. Their 
names occur early in, but not before, the Twelfth Dynasty, and become very common 
by the time of Sesostris III. 

10. The Phrase ‘in all his Places’ 

The phrase ^ ‘in all his places’, often augmented to ‘in all his beautiful 

and pure places’, which appears after the name of Osiris, is a characteristic of the 
Eleventh Dynasty. It occurs in eight out of ten (80 per cent.) of these formulae. In 
the Twelfth Dynasty it falls out of use, appearing in dated formulae only once, in the 
reign of Sesostris I. 

1 1 . The Combined Titles of Osiris 

The combined titles of Osiris are of interest chiefly because they change in each 
period. Thus in the Eleventh Dynasty they are usually 

In the reign of Sesostris I the title is added. Under Sesostris III all 
the titles are usually dropped, except Hnty Imntyuo. From the end of the reign of 
Ammenemes III Osiris, sometimes called Ptah-Soker-Osiris, often bears the title 

Thus the formula in the Middle Kingdom is seen to be a growing organism; not 
merely a collection of ancient meaningless phrases, an idea held in some quarters. 

In the accompanying table, for the sake of brevity, the titles are given the following 
letters: d, nb Ddw\ k, hnty Imntyzv, n, ntr cr, a, nb sbdw\ t, nb rnh-T^wy. 



dka dkna 






Xlth Dynasty 

. 9 90 — 






Sesostris I 

— II 42 





I 4 


Ammenemes 1 1 

I 7 : 2 13 : 



i 2 

13 ! 

■ I 7 




Sesostris III . 

— ( — i 






Ammenemes III 

. ; — ^ I 6 1 



4 24 

I 6 j 


Later . 


“ i 




I 13 

4 50 



In order to differentiate clearly between formulae of the Eleventh Dynasty and 
Twelfth Dynasty, and bemeen those of the early and later Twelfth Dynasty, the results 
of the analysis tables are here summarized. 

The period marked ‘Early Xllth Dynasty’ in the tables is from Sesostris I to Ammen- 
emes II; the period ‘Later Xllth Dynasty’ from Sesostris HI to the Thirteenth 

Characteristic Eleventh- Dynasty Forms 

Xlth Dynasty Early Xllth Dynasty \ Later Xllth Dynasty 

I. pruhnjo ..... 







2. Osiris with determinative . 







3- Hnty Imntyw .... 







4. Nb Ddw ..... 







6. Im^hw ..... 







10. ‘In all his places" 





; 35 


II. dka . . . . . 





' 33 


Characteristic Early Twelfth-Dynasty Forms 

Xlth Dynasty Early Xllth Dynasty \ Later Xllth Dynasty 

3. Hnty Imntyzv with determinative 







5. ‘Great God" .... 







6. Kf n imfhw .... 







II. dkna ..... 







II. dna ..... 







Characteristic Later Twelfth-Dynasty Forms 

Xlth Dynasty 

Early Xllth Dynasty 

Later Xllth Dynasty 

I. di'f prt’hrw .... 







2. Osiris without determinative 







3. Hnty Imntyw without deter- 







6. Kf w . . . - • 







7. Incense and oil ... 







8. ‘On which the god lives" 







II. ^ 







II. kna ..... 







II. f . 








Cairo Museum: i. 20518. 2. 20516. 3. 20515. 4. 20542. 5. 20539. 6. 20131. 
7.20239. 8.20025. 9.20656. 10.20733. 11.20536. 12.20140. 13.20773. 14.20231. 
15. 20691. 16. 20310. 17. 20683. British Museum: 18. 614. 19. 1203. 20. 572. 




21. 828. 22. 567. 23. 583. 24. 829. 25. 569. 26. 570. 27. 257. 28. 573. 29. 559. 
30. 202. 31. 249. 32. 831. 33. 1290. 34. 557. 35. 827. 36. loi. 37. 1164. Louvre 
Museum: 38. C i. 39. C 3. 40. C 2. 41. C 166. 42. C 4. 43. C 167. 44. C 170. 
45. C 5. 46. C 8. 47. C 7. 48. C 12. 49. C 14. 50. C 7. Berlin Museum: 51. 1192. 
52.1199. 53.1198. Leyden Museum : 54. V 2. 55. V 3. 56. V 4. 57. V 6. 58. V 7. 
59. Munich Museum, No. 27. 60. Garstang, El Ardbah, pis. iv, v. 61. 62. 63. Spiegel- 
berg & Fortner, Aegyptische Grabsteine imd Denksteine, i, 18. 64. 65. Petrie, Oiirneh, 
pi. 2. 66. Alnwick Castle Museum, 264. 67. New York, Guide to the Collections {igg4), 
10. 68. JEA XIV, 237. 69. Newberry, Beni Hasan, i, pi. 12. 70. Op. cit.,p\. 19. 71. 
Op. cit., pi. 15. 72. 73. Op. cit., pi. 7. 74. Op. cit., pi. 20. 75. Op. cit., pi. 15. 76. 

Op. cit., pi. 37. 77. Op. cit., pi. 24. 78. 79. Op. cit., pi. 33. 80. 81. Op. cit., pi. 24. 

82. Bull. MMA, 1920-1, 51. 83. 84. 85. Op. cit., 46. 86. 87. Deir el-Bahari, 
XI Dyn., Ill, pi. 2. 88. Op. cit., pi. 3. 89. Cairo Mus. Catalogue (iggi). No. 623. 

90. Blackman, Meir, i, pi. 9. 91. 92. Op. cit., ii, pi. 12. 93. 94. Op. cit., iii, pi. 19. 

95. Op. cit., pi. 9. 96. Op. cit., pi. 27. 97. 98. Griffith & Newberry, El Bersheh, ii, 
pi. 7. 99. 100. loi. Petrie, Season in Egypt, pi. 4. 102. Op. cit., pi. 10. 103. 104. 105. 
Op. cit., pi. 7. 106. Petrie, History of Egypt, i, 197. 107. 108. 109. Gardiner & Peet, 
Inscr. of Sinai, pi. 32. no. Op. cit., pi. 41. in. Op. cit., pi. n. 112. Op. cit., pi. 36. 
113. Op. cit., pi. 45. 114. Op. cit., pi. 48. 115. Davies, Tomb of Antefoker, pi. 30. 
116. Griffith, Siiit and Der Rif eh, pi. i. 117. Brit. Mus. 1348. 118. Vienna, 65. 119. 
Geneva, d 50. 120. De Morgan, Eouilles a Dahchour, 94. 121. JEA xiv, 237. 

Classification of Formulae according to Period 

Eleventh Dynasty: Nos. 18, 19, 37, 49, 64, 65, 82-9. 

Ammenemes I: No. 90. 

Sesostris I: Nos. 1-5, 20, 38-41, 43, 44, 51, 52, 54, 56, 57, 59, 67, 69-75, 9 °- 9L 92, 
97. 98, 99> 102, 115, 116. 

Ammenemes II: Nos. 6, 7, 8, 21-6, 42, 55, 76-81, 93-6. 

Sesostris II: Nos. 27, 28. 

Sesostris III: Nos. 9, 10, 29-32, 60, 68, 119, 121. 

Ammenemes III: Nos. n-17, 33~6, 45, 53, 58, 100, loi, 103-12. 

Ammenemes IV: Nos. 47, 50, 61, 62, 63, 113, 114. 

Thirteenth Dynasty: Nos. 46, 48, 117, 118, 120. 

Plate X 


Plate X a 

— — 

1‘ TossJrt^Ohlt^ ® '*“*** « U/Jlu^O. /® :ffi Ct\th/yJ InJt du/rns'ili^ CtJ7. '^U ^ah. 


2^ I umoUa. ^ *'^4 (tfiteutM^. 

levU'tiAta Z^^'ltAta(L\<j 'ueutaLto.Z(^ A_//i!KjW'<^CyurtjiR 

a/. t//f ^tUnS OAtiuMj . 

Iw 'ifC/tUrttV^ 4.^^ <Wic^ ® (Vi^\/{M'iiOic 
'ImMX si^n k CIS /itff >=s , 

4'' ??/ Ih. ^'} itiSatl>^eK ‘t/ura'^ '^aj a. taU itAt isclfcvJ^ 

c=3^ j[^ c=i ’iaMi^cLJe^oAid ftosjib^ t=s . dU 'i-dfiJU indi'ea/ed. 

= llr . 4^ ^0^ head fit tj\Att slkekei 1 1 < at/ ^actdeaJJt^ Qa/oamJ ^ 

JfufiiMcdSfolicS n I aU adnosrccdcim/ . s(f' possild^ ho * i4>tUl\ . v5"^ I tj 

Ce\taut/u. ^le ^ is '^ndJLj inaJt (lAAcf'lbfki h^t 

H (W -4t('tutuS^ < • 

y« /// P^eJr^ atuciifJdJ^ ~J'^ C^oaI^ cziS o/nd not fcri 7^ einXiuto, 

S ^ See*r\S "ja^'^ C<Afiu 4 *J^ JittiU a UAC<intsl>act ■ieturte4\ Jl <i<t«{ ^aOnuruy^ ^euj>. 

S^ ^U4uv ^d^Aead lSii“tid~a taxijui At~CX*in4MXei\ £(jitrr^t Xu/tadxd tXe, 

^cci\ tn(^curt-d trhistoAt O/nd dXfMJ poAil^ o^XtdtAoXiJ e^tut CtotAtd. 'ij^ 

^ H aitnost etdoMO^ ^ pudt iKdeAMXtuLti^oud> ^liddcL<>^jaei}r^Ut iS^i/Ctv ito 
^Mujid^,hZ2.. JtamrdfficJt i dt.(ktah ti ^(tydkJ- xAxiitJcS Ift SeKadts W 
o/ic p&AddtLdt^nS^ $d A{/i<=>. 

$f CxJd^ "iruXis jAti’iUviiU ~ i?u .^fitdast i gnMii ptAyfui^ ».ddtd /aXu^ 

(j^ ^Atjt-mS <tXleuM^> CjX lidut t/bOitnis\tAdCn^lA^1^SCuJjt- 

Ol •^utAcdfc iC^^- 

10*^ Clp^aAcidl^'c:Z»*d.hat c=i . to^ Jkt upossM^ OfudjimXaJL, 


Plate XI 


Plate XI 

10^ ^ '4lvuu a/nd.ii\JjO\t.j^nnn^ tLO/trU. U cl MacU^ Jriuiuj^ ^ 'a/r\cL ^ jto^drL^ it misGjkt \ sc 

0. 10^ \\a/r\<L ^/aujjoSSi^arcLcfeiittJ^CXcu^ JnoiJjJKAjtacL^anvUtkk^^^^i^ 

fl^ IKIin Ls ^a^caJlL^ Cvila^ 11'^ A/o 

\\\ u/fidcK^^ 12^ iffu. Ust I 0^^ tr\(U^ i^iodUoAJ Cldclt(L l(J^ (2^ (^i*^n^AjtacL/ *, 
Jfut'JnfiJ Jfi MaJ^ adi^f^ol keM fS CxAfad/t^. ^JlraJltj fr\acU 

iJkjihu/tfiMcJi fs alnic^r tin lull* 

CLfdAJL^ /3^ iJAaCtb SujJ^ 13^ i^/uS 16 (^dJj^ tuA" Xr^ddiJ^caJU^io JUu^kiA ^^ 
U^/u^iAiSe^M iwy\^id ^ehSfaK(jj^2^mt^<^'^^ ‘^csimUe sutk^ CammctdoA^ (5^“^ Tufo sj^accs le^ 

13^ 3aM^ ^nud 

4^ ^ast I ffh liljf~ jitAAcLl>S ciddiil [a/lti (fl. ncuditUal. Canttut Jcn^o/t^Js Hill. l^l>a{rl^\\\\ 

Miin^d \ mMi^l^'Lcin^ acudt^^ iJj.^ fitAaf>s irfUi^ fieri pA.airaJULj,\n\\[ 
lllil. \J^ a^^oAfnJtltj SO. 1/^^ ^ JfoJ.(*j, jmirud- looks !nlfLttJki \ . 

IS^*- ^'Uist I enAji^t possJUij adcLJ Lilli. ^ cund not O asui tfii UHl^ Ms- tl- ^Jy Xflx sormi 
AjukH^ ;^c (s jxAoLxUe , IS^ifocLs 'LjLe^ tKiS tS^ ^iAst' \ cn Ax<^kt possutl^ adcLi 
isf [iL<^ Jmcll^ fex., AoCvm^. l^UAvh. ViAxj^ cluJUouS^ 

'^ssdlu JpciJlu^iytnu.d AuiJtt^ f(J^ W' 'C^ . l^^W\ jAadicallj^ 

CjuJcuuo^ /6^ I 6t\Au^st fio^sdrt^ added IcJteA. CiJaA/^u. 

H-h\nt ls Cc^dluH.. if I 

aJmvC H — sttmS dtxtoAA/o, fj^ ItXr^ edr^tou^ Ajt^loiofi^ *n \ i ^ ^ (Ail A. f I , OA^d 

SUpt h\jdjJ* if i^ku c^cruJ^ JjuuIl uUdtMJ, if 'l^sdil^ So Aa/diti J^ck 1 ^^Z^ 

1%^ lllfl iSpAdtoJdt V)^/ {fl^^ 1^^ ^(Ajt I Oh AA^fxM jioSStM^ adcUd Ldii. ^aCcdtltjlW^ 

diotlfx lJuAi/h/ nil jiOS^dA 1%^ l^olroj;^ 9)01“ ^ZSS $, 1^ ^ Iflu. \ 

justjxoss'dA , 

iCj^ dcoAl^ 

omd not , 


Plate XII 


Plate XII 

\ ^^C&TdiM/. l(j^ 'Rtssi^' 

'It^t jxAlajliS aldck/hJ^ . 

^0^ Setfn6 CtASouO . S.0^ Md^\=i, 

icf^ Lxxt 

• ffhJ 

hot taloAM. ^ a.]*^ 

Mil. 6tttyiS-la}\(^ cextauv, 2.^^ mmu 

cvdaitJ . ^C\a.^esLmdto^fiuSpo(L^Stje t^mth/oA^ 

21^ <%ttt OAL-yt^ossM^ iiaa4e^‘ — ' ‘ktu-^Uo afucl Cast. CiVUct{^X^^^ . 52^'^ a/yJ.D 

<ru<jMMllY A loA. AJrJtunr^^auh 4»U a/tn. inct^AuL Ji JUnk JUJtjOi mjutJLAitl So^hJ 

n fna^ M. . 

53“ a I euMO oaI^ am ^aujO. S.3^'^ ^kt AtaJu^^ K't^itA^^t sttms'i im c^uJt Ct/JoA] 

2 3 't — Z • 2 3^ tf. O-t fnostj kut ^XA/la^S ho(Ji.U)^ ^osC 

Ilf" mmluteahtiMt iuttoAtis %ujrly J }t(*Jk. mv$. XJf.^^ (ll>fjaAttJi^ Jo((jluM^. 

ccATattv. Mat t=z 2S‘^ 'UaiiJji' I > • . StS<^ CltwJtf lo ■ tS^Tuws suAt^l 

I ? 

AC O^^xxAUd^^O. Oa. ftf aL T^aicjsi^ns Ko irtffu si^t^ Ou^Cu 


( 83 ) 




This red granite stela,' the upper portion of which is wanting, was found by Alariette at 
Abydos and is now in the Cairo Museum. Measuring according to Breasted- i-20 by 
1-50 m., but according to Mr. B. A. Strieker^ 1-5 by 1-52 m., it still bears twenty-six 
lines of inscription, though how many are missing at the beginning it is impossible 
to estimate. The stela is not published in the Catalogue but is, says Strieker, ‘marked 
in the Journal d'entree under No. 66285’, and he also notes that it bears a mark -^VT- 
The only copy of the inscription yet published is that of Mariette,^ which, as Breasted 
observ^es, ‘is very incomplete and inaccurate’. The latter scholar was unable to make 
his own copy, as for some reason or other he could not locate the monument. Refer- 
ences to the content of the inscription have been made by Brugseh^ and Wiedemann.^ 
The only published translation known to me is that of Breasted,^ which since he was 
entirely dependent on Mariette’s copy cannot be regarded as reliable. 

Some years ago, having ascertained from my friend Prof. Cerny that the stela was 
now exhibited in the Cairo museum, I sent him a copy of Mariette’s version of the text 
asking him if he could possibly find time to collate it with the original. This he most 
kindly did, comparing it also with a copy made by M. Lacau, then Director-General of 
the Service des Antiquites. 

When Cerny returned me my manuscript with his notes and corrections he informed 
me that the inscription was veiy* difficult to read, the monument being in a bad light 
and the hieroglyphs not at all well engraved, and that the i\pw version of the text, 
despite various improvements, was still far from satisfactory. Accordingly I wrote and 
asked him whether he could secure me squeezes of the inscription. This he was able 
to do, thanks to the courtesy of M. Lacau, and excellent squeezes reached me in due 
course, by means of which I improved my version of the text veiy^ considerably. In 
the early part of 1935, when I was still living in Oxford, I was able most fortunately 
to study the squeezes with Prof. Gunn. Our joint examination resulted in further 
improved readings, while yet again renewed studies of the squeezes in Liverpool cleared 
up more obscurities, giving me, for example, |i in 1. 19 and in 1. 23, neither of 
which groups of signs had Gunn and I succeeded in deciphering. Here I should like to 
express my sincere thanks to Gunn for all the help he gave me and for his many valuable 
suggestions and acute observations, which have greatly added to the value of this article. 

^ See Breasted, Anc. Rec, iv, p. 325, n. d, 

3 Information kindly supplied me in a letter dated June 29, 1936. 

^ Abydos, ii, 36-7; Cat. general d' Abydos, Xo. 1225. 

^ Aeg. Gesch. 543. Cerny also refers me to Cat. Maspero, 491. 

2 Ibid. 

5 ZASi\,^S^ 

’ Op. cit. IV, §§ 6ys~S7' 



Judging from the squeezes the surface of the stone in the lower portion of the 
monument is in worse condition than it is in the upper portion, and the signs in 
the second half of the text are cruder and less legible than in the first half. Indeed the 
hieroglyphs in the last line (26) are so badly engraved and so much damaged that Gunn 
and I were able to make very little of them, despite a special squeeze of this section of 
the text made for me by Strieker. So indistinct are they that the very existence of the 
line in question escaped the notice of Mariette, for he makes his copy of the inscription 
end definitely with 1. 25. 

Gunn has remarked to me how uncertain he regards the numbers as being. This 
uncertainty is due not only to breaks and to what may be accidental markings in the 
granite, but in some cases to apparent alterations made by the engraver. Possibly an 
examination of the original in a strong side light might settle many points that look 
dubious in the squeezes. 


[and thou wilt suffer?] (i) the great prince of princes, Shoshenk, the justified, his son^ [to 

dwell]^ in the Seat of the Blessed^ near his father (f.e., Nemrat); thou wilL^ suffer him to [magnify P]^ 
his beauty in the city of Tewwer^ over against Rsi-wdf ; thou wilt suffer him to be in honour until 
the attaining of old age^, his son (2) continuing thereafter; thou wilt suffer him to participate in (?)^ 
the festivals of His Majesty, sharing united victory^® ? This great god assented very plainly* L Then 
His (IMajesty) spake again in the presence of this great god : My good lord*^, thou wilt slay*^ the (3) 
officer of the army*^, the sergeant*^, the scribe, the inspector, any messenger*^, any one sent on an 
errand to the country*^^ who shall seize*^ property belonging to this statue(?)*9 of the Osiris, the 
great chief of the Meshwesh^^, Nemrat, son of Mehetemweskhet^*, which is in Abydos; and (4) 
any people who shall take (aught)^^ away from its sacred property, to wit its land^^, its people, its 
cattle, its garden, any of its oblations, any endowments^*^^ belonging to it, thou wilt exercise thy great 
and mighty power against them and against their wives (5) and their children? This great god 
assented. Thereupon His Majesty kissed the ground before him. And His Majesty said : Thou art 
justified, O justified Shoshenk, thou great chief of the Meshwesh, prince of princes, my great one^^^ 
together with all thine adherents^^, (6) and thine army likewise^^, inasmuch as Amonrasonther 
favours thee because of all that thou hast done^^ for thy father; thou shalt obtain old age, abiding 
upon earth, thine heirs being upon thy seat for ever. 

Thereupon His Majesty sent the statue of the Osiris, great chief of (7) the Meshwesh, prince of 
princes, Nemrat, justified, northward to Abydos, many^^ king's messengers having been assigned 
to it with many boats without number^®, beside the messengers of the great chief of the Meshwesh. 
It was caused to rest in the (8) noble palace, the sanctuary of Rsi-wd^, in order that its purification^*, 
which takes place in the . . of Tewwer might be carried out at the tendering (to it) of the Opening 
of the Mouth33. Its purification was performed and they censed^^ it in (accordance with) the 
formulae of the House of the IVIoming^^ four days(?)3^. Its rituab^ was recorded in (9) the office of 
archives^^, according to what the lord of gods had said. A tablet of stone^^ of Elephantine was set 
up for it bearing the decree of Imn-rn-f, and it (the statue) was caused to repose in the sanctuaries of 
the gods for ever and ever. 

Regulations for maintaining the statue(?) of the Osiris, great chief of the Meshwesh, (10) 
Nemrat, justified, son of Mehetemweskhet, which is in Abydos. 

Brought from Lower Egypt*^® by the inspectors {rwdw) of the great chief of the Meshwesh who 
came with the image, the foreigner^* of Syria, the page Akhamenkanekht, justified (?)‘*^, and the 
foreigner (i i) of Syria, Akhptahkanekht, justified (?) : 15 deben of silver^^. 


What His Majesty gave*^ in addition : 20 deben of silver. 

Total : 35 deben of silver. 


Valuers of those^^ 50 arouras which are in the district of the high tract^^ south of Abydos, called 
W^h-(i 2 ) nsyt^^: 6 deben of silver. 

Those that are in the West+ 9 , in the land dependent for water on the well so which is in Abydos : 
50 arouras of land, making in silver 4 deben. 

Total. Tenanted land^^ in these two places, in the district of the high tract south of Abydos 
and the district of the high tract (13) north of Abydos, 100 arouras of land, making in silver 10 

The tenant-farmer(?)s- Fewer, son of . . .S 3 ; his bondman, Irbaks^; his bondman, Bupuamenkha^iss ; 
his bondman, Nashenumehs^; his bondman, DenitenhorS 7 . 

Total : (14) 5 men, making in silver 4 deben, i kites^. 

10 oxen, making in silver 2 deben^o. Their herdsman Psherinmut, justified, son of Harsiese, 
justified^®, making in silver 6| kite^k 

The garden which is in the district of the high tract north of Abydos, making in silver 2 deben. 
The gardener Harmose, justified, son of Penmenkh^-, (15) making in silver 6| kite. 

The weaver (?)^^, Nemeriu^-^, justified, son of Mehharenpaireref^^^ justified, whose mother is 
Tekenet^^, making in silver 6f kite. 

The weaver (?)^^, Nestatayt, justified, whose mother is Tedimut; the bondwoman, Tediese, 
daughter of Nebthepet, her mother being In . . . (16) imakh^^j the bondwoman, Tepeteramun^^, 
daughter of Penehsy, justified, her mother being Tentemu(tet)^ 9 , justified’^. 

Bee-keepers: 5 men, each one 6| kite per person, making in silver 3I deben^i, paid into the 
treasury of Osiris; and \ hin of honey passes out (17) daily from the treasury^ of Osiris to the sacred 
property of the Osiris, great chief of the Meshwesh, Nemrat, justified, for ever and ever, as the 
contribution of these <5' ^2 bee-keepers whose silver has been paid into the treasury of Osiris, so 
that they shall never die, so that they shall never be missing (?)73. 

Thurifer(s): (18) 5 men, each one 6| kite, making in silver 3! deben^^, paid into the treasury of 
Osiris; and the ^ kite of incense passes out daily from the treasury^ of Osiris to the sacred property 
of the Osiris, great chief of the Meshwesh, Nemrat, justified, whose mother is Mehetemweskhet, 
for ever and ever, as (19) the contribution of the 5 thurifers whose silver has been paid into the 
treasury of Osiris, so that they shall never die, so that they shall never be missing (?). 

Oil-man (?)“ 5 : i man, making in silver 6| kite, paid into the treasury of Osiris; and J hin of (20) 
luminant oil passes out daily from the treasury^ of Osiris for the lamp of the Osiris, great chief of 
the Meshwesh, Nemrat, justified, whose mother is Mehetemweskhet, for ever and ever, as the 
contribution of the oil-man (?), whose silver has been paid into the treasury" of Osiris, so that he 
shall never die, so that (21) he shall never be missing (?). 

One man’s gift.”^^ 

Brewer(s)77 : 2 men, each one 6| kite of silver 

Confectioner : ^ man, making in silver i kite 


paid into the treasury of Osiris, and this^^ 

barley and spelt passes out daily as bread and beer^o of the store-house from (22) the granary^ of 
Osiris and the brewery (?) of Osiris to the sacred property of the Osiris, great chief of the Meshwesh, 
Nemrat, justified, whose mother is Mehetemweskhet, for ever and ever, as the contribution of 
this cellar (?)^^ of the brewer}^ (?) and of the confectioner whose silver has been paid into the treasury 
of Osiris (23) . . . together with the har\^ests of this land from the 100 arouras which go into the 
granary of Osiris in the course of the year, so that they shall never die, so that they shall never be 
missing (?). 




The silver of the people which has been paid into the treasury of Osiris : 

(24) 8 deben 7§+| kite of silver s-, making in men whose contributions shall pass out 

from the treasury of Osiris to the sacred property of the Osiris, great chief of the Meshwesh, prince 
of princes, Nemrat, justified, son of the great chief of the Meshwesh, Shoshenk, justified, whose 
mother is Mehetemweskhet, for ever (25) and ever. 


The sacred property of the statue(?) of the Osiris, great chief of the Meshw'esh, justified (sic), 
Nemrat, justified, son of Mehetemweskhet, which is in Abydos : 

Land 100 arouras 

Men and women 25^+ 

Garden i 

Silver altar i 

Service-vesseP^ i 

Libationer (?) (26) making in silver deben 


1. Taking with Gardiner the view that p^-f sri is in apposition to Shoshenk and not 
the object of a verb of which Shoshenk is the subject. 

2 . Restoring similar. 

3. Or, perhaps, the ‘Abode of Spirits’, but anyhow meaning Abydos ; cf. Stela of Intef 
son of Senet (Sethe, Lesestiicke, 80, 13 ff.) which speaks of Abydos as 

‘a blessed place since the time of Osiris’. 

4. Sc. izv'k r dit. 

5. See pi. Xa, n. I*’. 

6. A locality, sacred to Onuris of This and Osiris, adjacent to Abydos or possibly a 
special quarter of Abydos itself, Gauthier, Diet. geog. vi, 65. According to Griffith, 
JEA XIII, 197, it was the sacred quarter of Abydos. 

7. = the Healthy Wakeful One, i.e., Osiris, see Wb. ii, 451. 

8. The reading is certain. Is hpw an abstract noun, or is it a participle and the 
passage to be translated ‘thou wilt suffer him to be more honoured than one who has 
attained old age’ ? Such words would apply well in the circumstance to Shoshenk. 
Ssp occurs again with khkh (izvk r ssp khkh) in 1. 6. 

9. Contrary to Wb. i, 79, instances occur in Ptolemaic texts of im/ with a direct 

object, e.g., sister Isis befriends him there’, Chassinat, Edfou vi, 

21, 2; ‘the Upper Egyptian crown fraternizing with the Lower Egyptian 

crown’, op. cit. v, loi ff. ; see also 70, 14 ff. The context suggests that in our passage 
imi means ‘participate in’, lit. ‘fraternize with’, ‘befriend’. 

10. For the expression dmd m sp wc see Wb. v, 459. 

11. For this meaning of wM see op. cit. i, 375. 

12. ^^=pri nb, ^ being placed after on calligraphical grounds. For this mode 
of addressing a god when asking for an oracular response see Blackman, xi, 250 ff. ; 
XII, 181 ; also Stela of Banishment, 11 . 10 ff. 

13. The r of futurity is here omitted, as so often in Late-Egyptian texts, before the 


14. The title r; n ms<’ also occurs Mariette, Karnak, 41, 3 (Dyn. XXI). 

15. For the word htyw see P. Anastasi I, 17, 5; Brugsch, Wb. v, 800; Peet, The 
Great Tomb-Robberies, 13, 187. It is here singular and accordingly to be read hty, see 
Peet, op. cit., 13, n. 4. 

16. without ^ as a writing of ipwty is not recorded in Wb. i, 304. For the 
use of the definite article /)/ in conjunction with nb ‘every’, ‘any’, see Erman, Neudg. Gr., 
§ 161. According to Erman this use occurs only in cases of participles and relative 
sentences. He therefore suggests that ‘the remarkable exception’ 

(P. Anastasi /, 21 , 8) may be due to the scribe’s regarding the foreign word as a participle, 
and explains Sim (Anienemope, 2, 3) as an irregular writing of itiiTHp 

HiAA, overlooking the fact that ns ntrzv nb occurs again in exactly the same context in 
P. Hood, 27 = Alaspero, Manuel de hierarchie egyptienne in Etudes egyptiennes, ii, 10. 
Yet another instance is to be found in Gardiner’s recently published Adoption Papyrus 
(JEA XXVI, pi. 5 a, 1 . 4), i.e. I ‘all that he possessed’. The occurrence 

of pf + noun + nb in this inscription in addition to the other examples cited shows that 
Erman’s statement and Gardiner’s note on P. Anastasi 1 , 21, 8 (= Late-Egyptian 
Hieratic Texts, i, 33 a, 10’') need correcting, especially as the construction 7)/ rmt nb, 
‘every man’, with following nty, ‘who’, is employed in demotic, see Spiegelberg, Dem. 
Gr., § 42. Gunn has drawn my attention to the following passage in the Poem on the 
Battle of Kadesh (see Selim Hassan, Le Poeme dit de Pentaour, pi. 67, 4), 

‘any one of them who fell lifted not up himself again’, a good 
example ofps+ participle +nb not noted by Erman, loc. cit. 

I'j. Cf. Decree of Elephantine, 5 (= Griffith, xiii, 207) and Sethe, Unters. ii, 83, 
though ‘the country’ in this instance cannot be the Dodecaschoenus. On the contrary, 
the occurrence of this expression in our inscription indicates that it is a regular formula 
in decrees of this sort and suggests that in the Decree of Elephantine also sht does not 
necessarily mean the Dodecaschoenus but rather, as here, ‘country’ as opposed to 

18. The -=> was possibly omitted and then added later by the engraver; see pi. Xa, 
n. 3®. On Breasted’s incorrect translation here see Gardiner, JEA xix, 27, n. i. 

19. The sign, which looks more like a chair than a food-and-drink table, is evidently 
a debased representation of a special form of the hnt-a\X.a.T of which mention is made in 
several Twentieth Dynasty inscriptions and which is discussed by Nelson in his 
interesting Three Decrees of Ramses HI from Karnak, JAOS LVi, 232 ff.' The hiero- 
glyph above the chair-like table is, of course, the phonetic sign <f), which in the original 
here, as well as in 11. 9 and 25, has the appearance of a badly formed a. 

The use here of p^y ‘this’ suggests that the ‘altar’ was mentioned in the missing lines 
of the inscription. But perhaps hnt thus written is here and elsewhere in this text a 
variant or miswriting of hnty ‘statue’ (see Additional Note, p. 94). 

20. For Mszcs, perhaps = Md^ve?, of which is an abbreviated writing, see 

Gauthier, Diet, ge'og. iii, 19; see also Gardiner, JEA xix, 23, who points out that the 
sign in the title = Libyan mss, ‘lord’, as well as 

^ I owe this reference to Gunn. 



for zvr, and that accordingly the sign was read ms ox itxr indifferently. Note that in our 
inscription the man’s head in the sign ^ = ms (zvr) is in all cases adorned with a long 
tuft of hair which projects above the forehead. 

21. See Ranke, Agypt. Personennamen, 164, 5. 

22. Sc. nty iww r hb. Hb n — hbi m, see Wb. iii, 253, ii. For the confusion of 
hbf and hbi see op. cit. iii, 251 ; 253. 

23. — here = the m of equivalence. 

24. See Wb. iii, 90. Gardiner tells me that he is dealing fully with this word in his 
Commentary to Pap. Wilbotir. 

25. The sign following r/ I take to be a determinative; otherwise, as Gunn points 
out, one would expect p after it, as at the beginning of 1. 8. 

26. Is this, asks Gunn, why the names of nearly all the persons connected with 
Nemrat’s funerary cult at Abydos are designated mi<’-hrwi However, as he points out, 
the people mentioned in the Ewerot Stela are similarly designated. Perhaps the people 
designated msc-hrw on the Stela of Shoshenk bore that attribute because they were 
connected with the cult of Osiris at Abydos, being under the control of his priesthood 
or actually in that god’s service, see also below, p. 93. 

27. Cf. m-mitt iry. 

28. Perf. relat. sdm-n-f. In the missing portion of this inscription there was evidently 
some reference to the cult which Shoshenk intended to institute for his dead father at 

29. Probably so rather than ‘great king’s-messengers’. Cf. wr ‘howmany’, Copt. ©“yMp. 

30. Nn is, as Gunn observed to me, obviously a bungled writing of nn r-r-sn, 
see Wb. ii, 394. 

31. See pi. Xa, n. 8^’. Emend and cf. ^^^71 farther on in the same line. 

32. Neither Gunn nor I have been able to decipher this badly engraved and 
apparently mutilated group of signs. The accompanying cut represents all that I can 

see of them. It is difficult to decide on what are engraved lines and what are 
breaks or scratches. 

33. For the significance of this rite see Blackman, JEA v, 59 ff. ; x, 57. 

34. Probably, as Gunn suggests, = snt(r)‘w sw, the ^ of being for 

although placed before the determinative, and the r having dropped off as in couxe, 

35. For pr-dwit (originally the royal toilet-chamber) as a name of the place, usually 
designated pr-nZ)^, ‘House of Gold’, in which the Opening of the Mouth was performed 
on statues, see Blackman, jfEA v, 159, and for other instances of its employment in 
connexion with the funerary liturgy, op. cit. v, 162. 

36. That 1°, represents ‘four days’, and not i*^,, ‘4 times’ as one might well have 
expected, in view of the frequent directions in Egyptian liturgical texts for the fourfold 
repetition of a formula or ritual act,' is suggested by the fact that elsewhere in this 
inscription sp has the form t? not o . 

’ See, e.g., Budge, Book of Opening the Mouth, ii, 2, 3, and 1 1 ; Moret, Rituel du mite divin journalier en 
Egypte, 205 ff. 


37. i.e,^ the ceremonies performed in the statue’s honour, including the presentation 
to it of food- and drink-offerings. 

38. Hi n ss also occurs P. Abbott 7, 16; P. Leopold II, 4, 3 ; P. Harris 26, 9; 47, 8; 

cf. j Ewerot Stela, 7 = ZAS xxxv, 14. 

39. ( = /+ wr + determinative) as a writing of inr, ‘stone’, is not recorded in lVb.i,gy. 

40. In is a perfect, pass, partic. and the second — is for m. 

41. ^ is probably to be read h^sty, the singular of see Wb. iii, 236. The 

same word seems to be written at the end of the line. 

42. I formerly read this and the following name as Ih-imn-snhi and Ih-pth-snhi 

respectively, see Ranke, op. cit., 414, 2. 3. However, the sign above ^ is certainly not 
— in either instance, but looks much more like a badly formed =51 . Gunn has drawn 
my attention to the fact that in this inscription [] closely resembles Thus the 
apparent (] following the determinative in both names may be for ( having been 
omitted by the sculptor as in the case of the name in 1 . 14. If the sign above 

2 is "“S', that group is presumably to be read nht, despite the fact that according to 
Wb. II, 314, this writing of nht is not earlier than the Ptolemaic period. 

43 . Throughout this text it will be observed that the cardinal numbers when placed 
after the noun to which they refer are generally preceded by '™', e.g. dbn n 15, ‘15 
deben’,' dbn n 20, ‘20 deben’, dbn n J5, ‘35 deben’, Uy sUt n 50, ‘these 50 arouras’ 
( 1 . ii), ih n 10, ‘10 oxen’ ( 1 . 14), s n 5, A rnen’ ( 1 . 16), etc. This form of enumeration 
is recorded neither by Erman, Neudg. Gr., nor by Sethe, Von Zahlen und Zahlworten. 
But, as Gunn has pointed out to me, there are several occurrences of a similar 
phenomenon in Wenamun, e.g. 7, 9. ii ff. and 3, 8. Gardiner, Late-Egyptian Stories, 
6i“, n. 1,9 a, expresses the opinion that the sign in question, which in hieratic is a 
more or less horizontal line, is a space-filler. If his view is correct, the engraver of our 
inscription, who doubtless had to turn into hieroglyphic a hieratic original, mechanically 
transcribed as — the character which stands equally for that hieroglyph and the space- 
filler. However, it is just possible that in these enumerations we have the account- or 
list-form carried to an extreme and that such combinations as dbn n J5, ih n 10, ‘deben, 
of, 15’, ‘ox, of, 10’, are really to be read J5 7i dbn, 10 n ih, ‘15 of deben’, ‘10 of ox’, a not 
unusual Late-Egyptian equivalent of our ‘15 deben’, ‘10 oxen’, Erman, op. cit., § 247. 

Gardiner informs me that — before a numeral occurs over and over again in Treason, 
Uinscription de Chechanq ler an Miisee du Caire in Mdanges Maspero i, 822 ff., where 
wefind,e.^.,^Rn (1. 12); 12); ^7(1. 13); ^7 (1. 15 and often); ^7 (1. 19). 

He thinks that the occurrence of this n before i and 2 speaks against interpretation as a 
real n. Treason comments on the use, op. cit., 832-3. 

44. This writing of the perfect, rel. form of the verb rdi is not recorded in Sethe’s 
Verbum or Erman’s Neudg. Gr. 

For another example of rdi hr = ‘give in addition to’ something else see 

‘together with these three bondmen from the Northern Region which 
he gave in addition to it’, Ewerot Stela, 22. 

45. Lit. ‘What will replace’. 

' But not in the case of the deben and kite apart from the three examples in 1. ii. 



46. The use of the demonstrative here suggests that mention had been made of the 
50 arouras in the lost portion of the inscription. 

47. With vm ki here and in the following line cf. Ewerot 

Stela, 2. 

48. = ‘Enduring of Kingship.’ 

49. The reading is practically certain (see pi. XIa, n. 12^). As these particular 50 
arouras are said just below to be north of Abydos, it is to be supposed that the author 
of the document meant to imply that though they were situated north of the city they 
also lay somewhat to the west of it. 

50. Gardiner wrote to me suggesting that is possibly connected with the verb 
sdff (IVb. IV, 383) = ‘feed’, ‘victual’, ‘provision’. He compared p^| (IVb. iv, 370, i), 

(wrongly transcribed s; in Wb. iv, 197, 16) which are apparently Late- 
Egyptian writings of p (IVb. IV, 384, i). The word sdp (sdf) occurs in the 

phrase hr sdp (sdf) n, which seems to mean ‘dependent for its supplies on’, lit. ‘upon 
the supply of’, judging from the passage [i 3 » Petrie, 

Tarkhan, i, pi. Ixxx, 1 . 21. This passage I would translate: ‘His Majesty made this House 
dependent for its supplies (income) on the House of Ptah.’ Our word is evidently a 
noun followed by the genitival — and, in view of the determinative, I take it to mean 
something like ‘land sustained by water’. Hence my rendering ‘the land dependent 
for water (on the well)’. Gardiner now tells me, however, that he feels practically 
certain that sdf cannot be the reading here, especially on account of the determinative 
However, he finds himself unable to suggest any alternative. 

The masculine word ^ ~ is common in Pap. Wilbour, according to Gardiner, and 

it will be fully treated by him in his Commentary on that text. The same scholar also 
tells me that in the Onom. Golenischeff it is separated from 0 ^ ‘iJid he adds that 

it may mean ‘well’, but has nothing to prove it. 

Is the well (}) in question that of which Strabo speaks (see Frankfort, The Cenotaph 
of Seti I at Abydos, 32)? 

5 1 . This rendering of iht nmhw has been suggested to me by Gardiner, see also his 
remarks, xix, 21, with n. 4. 

52. The accompanying cut is a facsimile of the sign, which I suggest may be a 
bungled form of 3. For the meaning ‘tenant-farmer’ see Gardiner, Eg. Gr., 
p. 500, T 24, n. 5. 

53. See pi. XIa, n. 13“^’®. For the name Fewer see Ranke, op. cit., 104, 4. 

54. A name not elsewhere recorded; see Ranke, op. cit., 415, 24. 

55. Not elsewhere recorded, but cf. Ranke, op. cit., 94, 15 (Bw-h/cf); 262, 18 
(Hfr-szv-imn)', 262, 20 (Hic-szc-n-imn). 

56. Not otherwise known; see Ranke, op. cit., 422, 13. 

57. See Ranke, op. cit., 400, 10-12. 

58. If the four bondmen were worth 6| kite each, as are most of the people listed 
below, the farmer was worth i deben 45 kite. 

59. If the reading 1 i is correct an ox was worth 2 kite of silver. 

* From my own copy made from a squeeze. The very short diagonal stroke under is possibly accidental. 


60. See above, n. 42. For the name Psherinmut, see Ranke, op. cit., 118, 19. 

61. This seems to be the value of each man — apart from the farmer Fewer (see n. 58) 
— whose services were employed in the maintenance of the cult of Nemrat’s statue. 

62. See Ranke, op. cit., 108, 10. 

63. Or possibly ‘the fowler’, see IF^. iv, 263. 

64. An unintelligible and hitherto unrecorded name. 

65. Unknown elsewhere; see Ranke, op. cit., 423, 3. 

66. Unknown elsewhere; see Ranke, op. cit., 423, 18. 

67. Of this name Ranke wrote; ‘Namen, die mit y beginnen, kenne ich nicht. 
Ebensowenig solche, die das Wort ^ enthalten!’ 

68. A name otherwise unknown ; see Ranke, op. cit., 430, 20. 

69. Cf. op. cit., 109, 16 and 17. 

70. The value of Nestatayt and his bondmen is not given, an omission probably due 
to the carelessness of the sculptor. 

71 . The amount should be 3 1 not 3 1 deben. ■=p is probably a mistake of the engraver 

72. See pi. XIa, n. 17'. 

73. So Gardiner suggests he bn hvic >'k should be rendered. See below, p. 94. 

74. The use of the definite article here indicates that this daily contribution of 
incense had been mentioned in the missing portion of the text. 

75. Possibly a nisbe-iorm derived from rtidw, see IVb. i, 208, 7. 

76. The lost portion of the inscription would probably have informed us as to the 
identity of this mysterious ‘one man’. 

77. Have we here a nisbe-form from rrt, ‘portal’, they not being written, as it also is 
not in the case of in 1 . 19 (see n. 75) ? The fact that the two men of the ''rt seem 
to be responsible for the daily allowance of beer offered to Xemrat’s statue and the 
statement that ‘this barley and spelt pass out daily as bread and beer . . . from the 
granary of Osiris and the cyt of Osiris’ suggest that in the temple of Osiris at Abydos 
rrt was at this period the designation of the temple brewery, ryt = ryyt (UP. i, 210, 17) 
lit. means ‘portal’, and we may suppose that the breweiy in question was situated in 
or closely attached to some large ornamental gateway in the temple precincts known as 
‘the portal’. We possibly therefore shall not be going far wrong if we render in 1 . 21 
(= rrtj ?) by ‘brewer’ and ryt in 1. 22 by ‘brewery’. 

78. Should be if kite. has evidently been omitted by the engraver (see n. 82). 

79. The use of the demonstrative adjective here suggests that the daily contribution 
of bread and beer had already been discussed earlier in the missing lines, 

80. For this writing of hnkt see IF^. lii, 169. For a facsimile of the some- 
what mutilated group of signs in question see the adjacent cut. 

81. The reading ^ ~ is by no means certain. For the meaning assigned to it here 
see IF^. I, 402. 

82. 8 deben ~~]\ — \ kite 8 deben 8J kite. This amount is correct, being the value 
of 5 bee-keepers, 5 thurifers, i oil-man, and 2 brewers at 65 kite each, and -] baker 
at i ;|/ kite (see n. 78). 



83. Should be 1 3 

84. The number should surely be 245. 

85. Hbntnsms. 


After having somewhat blindly adhered to Breasted’s opinion^ that the Shoshenk 
responsible for the erection of this stela was the father of Nemrat, I am now convinced 
by Dr. Gardiner’s arguments, propounded to me in several interesting letters, that 
Wiedemann was correct in making this Shoshenk Nemrat’s son, the future Shoshenk I, 
founder of the Twenty-second Dynasty.^ Where Wiedemann has erred is in maintain- 
ing that Shoshenk was actually occupying the throne at this time and that ‘His Majesty’ 
in 11. 2 and 5 refers to him, a view which this new version of the text shows is impossible. 
If Gardiner’s suggestion, which I accept, is correct, the king in question must be the 
last of the priestly rulers of the Twenty-first Dynasty, namely Pesibkhenno II, circa 
958-945 B.C. 

Reading between the lines the situation which led to the erection of this stela seems 
to have been as follows. Nemrat, a powerful military chief, we may suppose, like his 
son Shoshenk, had been not only in control of the district round about Heracleopolis 
IVIagna, where his family had long been settled,^ but held sway also in Abydos, which 
he had made the seat of his executive and administrative powers. When Nemrat died 
Shoshenk desired to establish a funerary cult for him in Abydos, the most important 
centre of the worship of Osiris, the king and god of the dead. The inscription gives 
us no reason for assuming that Shoshenk intended, as Breasted imagines, to bury 
Nemrat at Abydos — his tomb was more probably situated in the necropolis of his 
native city, Heracleopolis — but on the contrary plainly indicates that what he wanted 
to do was to erect a statue of him in the temple of Osiris. By this means Nemrat could 
participate in all the ceremonies performed in and near that temple and obtain the 
spiritual benefits to be derived from such participation.'^ Furthermore Shoshenk claimed 
from the king the right to succeed to his father’s important office, as is evident from the 
words in 11. i and 2 of our inscription. 

Before acceding to either request the king consulted the god Amen-Re^,^ appealing 
for an oracular response in the customary manner.^ The god, having assented to both 
propositions, was then asked if he would punish with death any people who should 
misappropriate or plunder the landed property and other endowments by which the 
cult of Nemrat’s statue was to be maintained. To this question the god replied in the 
affirmative, whereupon the king informed Shoshenk that he was ‘justified’ together 
with all his adherents and his army, inasmuch as Amonrasonther favoured him because 
of all that he had done for his father, a statement clearly indicating that it was Shoshenk 

* Anc, Rec. iv, § 669. 

^ Aeg. Gesch., 543 ff. Shoshenk as the name of the father of Nemrat only occurs in 1. 24, where it is mentioned 

3 Breasted, op, cit. iv, §§ 787 ff. * See A. M. Blackman, xxi, 6-7. 

5 Nebwenenef and Osorkon in the reigns of Harnesses II and Takelothis II respectively were similarly 
appointed high priests of Amen-Re< by an oracle of that god ; see Sethe, ZAS XLiv, 32 ; Erman, ZAS XLV, 4. 

^ Cf, Gardiner, ^^£*24 xix, 19, with n. 3. 


himself who had demanded the erection at Abydos of Nemrat’s statue and the establish- 
ment of its cult there. It should here be pointed out that Breasted, as Gardiner noted 
some years ago,' has gone completely astray in his interpretation of the question laid 
before Amen-Re' concerning the misappropriation of endowments, not recognizing 
that 11. 2 flF. are simply the protective formulae common at this period^ and that they 
refer to the future and not to the past. 

It can surely be claimed that this new version of the text of the Stela of Shoshenk 
possesses some historical importance, throwing, as it does, a ray of light on the hitherto 
somewhat obscure course of events leading up to the establishment of the Twenty- 
second Dynasty. It is clear, as Gardiner has remarked to me, that at the time when this 
inscription was engraved Nemrat’s son Shoshenk was a powerful military chief who 
professed to be a friend and supporter of Pesibkhenno II. So great, indeed, was his 
power that the king is represented as asking Amonrasonther that he may participate, 
as a nearly equal partner, in the royal festivals and victories! In due course, like 
Ammenemes I many centuries before, Shoshenk took advantage of his exceptionally 
strong position and mounted the throne as the founder of a new line of pharaohs. 

The account of how Nemrat’s statue was solemnly conveyed to Abydos, and there 
set up in the temple of Osiris, after the performance of the necessary rites, is followed 
by an enumeration of the endowments — land and other sources of revenue — by which 
its cult was to be maintained. 

How were these endowments administered? It will have been observed that the 
herdsmen, the gardener, the two weavers (?), and one weaver’s bondwoman are given 
the attribute ‘justified’, but not the farmer Fewer and his bondmen. Does this imply 
that the former were regarded as actual servants of Osiris, and that the garden, the 
10 oxen, and the weavers (?) were directly controlled by the priests, whereas Fewer, 
because he was farming ‘tenanted land’, was not technically a servant of the god, but 
was only bound by contract to hand over to the temple authorities the harvests of the 
land he tilled (see 1. 23), less, no doubt, the amount he was allowed to retain for the 
support of himself and his dependants ? This contract was perhaps fully set forth in 
the earlier, and now missing, part of the inscription, which may well have contained a 
detailed account of how all the endowments were to be administered {cf. Commentary, 
nn. 19, 74, and 79) as well as a description of the actual cult itself.^ 

It will have been noted that the values of all the above-mentioned people, cattle, and 
land, are given in terms of silver,"* in order to make clear to the priests of Osiris the 
exact worth of what they were receiving in return for the services to be rendered by 
them to the statue and for their furnishing the necessary materials for the upkeep of 
its cult. Beside this not inconsiderable accretion to their wealth the priests, no doubt, 
received also the 35 deben of silver, the joint gift of the king and Shoshenk. 

But the cost of maintaining this cult did not end here. Honey was required for 

I See above, p. 87, n. 18. ^ See e.g. Ewerot Stela, 11 . 26 ff. — ZAS xxxv, 15 ff. 

3 See the words in 1 . 9, ‘according to what the lord of gods had said’, words evidently referring to some 
passage in the lost beginning of the text. 

^ Except by the engraver’s carelessness in the case of Nestatayt and his two bondwomen. 



sweetening the cakes presented to the statue, incense for its fumigation, oil for the lamp 
kept burning in front of it,' while bread had to be baked and beer brewed for the daily 
offerings. Accordingly the value in silver of five bee-keepers, five thurifers, and one 
oil-man was paid into the temple treasury, doubtless by Shoshenk, in return for which 
i hin of honev, 5 kite of incense, and ^ hin of luminant oil were delivered every day 
to those who administered the statue’s ‘sacred property’. Furthermore a person 
designated ‘one man’ (see Commentary, n. 76) paid into the temple treasury the value 
in silver of two brewers (?) and confectioner to ensure the daily supply of bread and 
beer for the statue. The reason for the payment of only the J value of a confectioner was 
evidently because the priesthood was to receive every year the harvests produced by 
the 100 arouras of land. 

We are not told in the surviving part of the inscription who were to perform the 
ceremonies on behalf of the statue. Probably these duties devolved on members of the 
temple-staff, including possibly the ‘five thurifers’. And it may well have been the duty 
of the oil-man to tend the lamp and see to the lighting of it. 

The recurring formula ‘so that they shall never die, so that they shall never be 
missing (?)’ and the words ‘for ever and ever’ (r-s^r nhh dt) obviously imply that 
Shoshenk intended the cult of his father’s statue at Abydos to be maintained in its 
entirety for all time. It is to be noted that, when the formula in question is employed, 
no names are mentioned, the reason being that the services envisaged are not those of 
specified individuals, whose death would put an end to their activities, but of endless 
relays of officiants, selected as required by the priesthood from their own body or from 
among their underlings. 

In Breasted’s opinion^ this text should furnish us ‘with useful data for determining 
the current value of various property in modern standards’. Accordingly it might here 
be pointed out that every male attached to the cult of Nemrat’s statue, except Fewer, 
appears to have been valued at 6| kite, while in the Ewerot Stela^ 32 male and female 
slaves are valued at 15 deben 1^ {sic) kite, which averages about qf kite each. In the 
Twenty-fifth Dynasty, however, a Lower Egyptian slave cost in Thebes 2 deben 4 kite,'' 
and, according to a Twentieth Dynasty papyrus published by Gardiner, s a slave-girl 
changed hands at 4 deben i kite. This, as Gunn observ'ed when drawing my attention 
to these facts, is an extraordinary’ range of prices. 

Unfortunately the numerals in our text are by no means certain, and before any 
definite conclusions are drawn, the original monument, as already remarked (p. 85), 
should be carefully examined. 

IVIy colleagues will be glad to know that the squeezes are now lodged in what I trust 
is a fairly safe place. 


Since this article was printed, Dr. Gardiner has suggested to me that the word hit in 11 . 3, 9 
and 25, which elsewhere means ‘altar’ (see Commentary, n. 19) is in these three instances a variant 
or miswriting of hnty ‘statue’. At first I was disinclined to accept this somewhat daring proposal, 

= 0 /». IV, § 669. ^ ZASxxxk , 21. 

5 jfEA XXI, 140 ff. 

' See Urk. iv, 771, i ; 772, 2. 6. 
\l6ller, Ztvei Ehevertrage, 26. 


but the more I considered it the more it appealed to me. As Gardiner remarks, it is very odd 
that 11 . 3, 9 and 25 should talk of a hit ‘altar’ of Nemrat and 1 . 6 of a hnty ‘statue’, ‘This fact’, 
he goes on to say, ‘gives an illogicality to the entire inscription which I feel to be intolerable.’ I 
frankly confess that I now find myself in agreement with this view, and have accordingly some- 
what modified n. 19 and substituted ‘statue (?)’ for ‘altar’ as the rendering of hit in the Translation. 
Gardiner’s suggestion finds further support in the fact that the equipment of the hit (1. 25) 
comprised a silver altar (hney), which would surely be superfluous if the hit were itself an altar. 

( 96 ) 


By N. 1VL and N. DE G. DAVIES 

The most valuable relic of this ruined tomb (No. 84 at Thebes) is the picture of the 
tribute of the north and south lands found on the west wall of the front hall (pi. XIII).* 
Not that it presents much that is new, but confirmation of other records is of value 
and enough remains of the interspersed dockets to be of special interest. As usual, 
the close similarity of the picture to other versions of the theme never amounts to 
mere copying; it was easier for the facile draughtsman to make independent drawings. 
The tomb dates from the last years of Tuthmosis III, its owner being therefore a con- 
temporary of Rekhmire^ Amunedjeh appears also in the tomb of Userhet (No. 56), 
without any statement of his relation to his host. This mention has been taken to mean 
that Amunedjeh lived and worked on into the reign of Amenophis II, but that view is 
probably erroneous. 2 The text introducing the scene^ describes it as 

‘The ceremonious appearance of the King on the great throne in the palace of Heliopolis of Upper 
Egypt, his heart very greatly uplifted with prowess and victory. Thereupon men brought tribute to 
the might of His Majesty from the lands of wretched Retnu^ for his father Amen-Re', who formed 
him and created his dignity ( ?) and set the Mehenit uraeus [enduringly ?] on his head, the Divine 
Ennead being his companions. The south lands bearing their offerings and the north (land) loaded 
to the utmost were brought to him by . . . Amunedjeh.’ 

This text is placed over an erased figure of Amunedjeh, and is followed by Syrians 
bringing gifts in three (five ?) registers, of which only the upper two have survived. The 
men are alternately of the fair-complexioned type with cropped hair and wearing a long, 
white, sleeved gown, and of the dark, bushy-haired type, clothed in a kilt. Both 
garments have blue edgings. The men are introduced by a docket in three columns, 
the broken state of which can partially be made good. 

I I 

‘The arrival in peace of chiefs of Retnu, . . . with humble obeisances.’ 

* Mrs. Davies is responsible for the more important contribution here, the tracing and inking in of the 
plate. The text is by Mr. Davies. 

2 W. Hayes in Ann. Serv. xxxiii, 6-i6. The implication is that he married the daughter of Userhet. But he 
was old for this and the wall may have stated otherwise (his wife’s father being perhaps Amenerhetef). I suggest 
that he may have been the father of Userhet and that he shared the fate of Rekhmire«, and perhaps of other 
officials whose misfortune it was to be bequeathed to Amenophis II from the previous reign. For his tomb was 
defaced and given over for re-use by Mery, high-priest of Amun and subsequently owner of Tomb 95. But 
Userhet ventured to immortalize Amunedjeh once or twice in his tomb by a brief and vague appearance. A 
stela at Marseilles (Rec^ Trav. xili, 120; Lieblein, Diet, des NomSy 2150) will probably have come, like the 
statue in New York, from the mortuary temple of Tuthmosis III at Thebes. ^ Sethe, Urk. iv, 951. 

^ Note that the palace of Amenophis II was at Erment, a place with which the kings of Dyn. XVIII had 
specially close relations and wffiich lay within the Theban nome. 

5 The tomb of Rekhmire' adds, after ‘Retnu’, ‘all the northern lands of Farther Asia’ (Sethe, Urk. iv, i loi), 
but this is not suggested by the remains in the lacuna here. 


The first man carries a vase the rim of which is fenced with groups of pomegranates. 
A blue frog of lapis lazuli ( ?) sits on an unseen pedestal in the centre. This vase is 
labelled nbw hnw{ ?), ‘a vessel of gold’.^ This admired design, or a variant of it, is shown 
in other tombs also.- A second man brings a blue cruse. A third drags a chariot of the 
usual type by its pole and carries its quiver ‘a chariot and its fittings’).^ 

A fourth brings a bow and quiver and, on his shoulder, a falchion and a sword ( ?).+ A 
fifth leads a horse with a neck as exaggeratedly long and thin as that in the tomb of 
Rekhmiref.5 A sixth does the same and carries a bow and a halberd. A seventh man 
bears a blue, double-handled jar. The docket is what one would expect, ‘vessel of lapis 
lazuli’.^ The last man in the row is an Egyptian scribe. 

Second Row. There is again a descriptive note in five separate columns : 


‘The chief of Naharain prostrates himself, while giving praise to His Majesty because of the 
greatness of his might throughout the north land (or ‘‘all lands^’).’ 

Four men were shown here on their knees in an adoring or beseeching attitude, present- 
ing as a propitiatory^ gift the seductive frog-vase and probably an additional bribe, now 
lost with the lower figures. The dress of these four leaders is slightly different, not as a 
sign of rank, but because the gown opened out in front with the stretching of their legs. 
Both of the two men preserved have close-cropped skulls. The man behind them brings 
a basket of lapis lazuli (so named) in blue lumps, and a dagger. The next carries ajar of 
sntr incense and one of those horns of ointment ending in a hand, into the palm of 
which the salve pours when the horn is reversed. The name of the object or its contents 
ended in b. The seventh man carries a white single-handled jar labelled hd Jinw, ‘a 
silver vessel’, a strip of cloth, and a quiver. The eighth man brings a basket of lapis 
lazuli and a white linen sash or dress-piece having a red and blue edging and tassels.'^ 
A ninth Syrian brings some of those hard-wood sticks which are alwavs done up in 
bundles^ and a silver vase, in form and description like the preceding one. The last man 
holds a bear in leash. The animal is excellently drawn and probably was as acceptable a 
present as could be brought. A scribe again closes the file. 

It will be seen that the details of the corresponding scenes in the tomb of Rekhmire' 
appear to have been in the memory' of the draughtsman, making it likely that the same 

^ The vase is now red instead of yellow, the tomb having been fired. It should be noted that the colours 
shown in the unattractive plates of Max Muller {Egypt. Researches, 11, pis. 23-8) must be ignored. Half of them 
are completely wrong or uncertified, and the rest only approximately right. 

2 See Davies, Theban Tombs Series, v, p. 8, No. 44, with references. 

3 Dr. Gardiner has filled the lacuna for me. Cf. Sethe, Urk. iv, 691. 

^ Davies, loc. cit., Xos. 59, 61, 76, 77. 

5 Davies, Paintings. Tomb of Rekhmire^, pi. ii. 

^ dockets are written from right to left, probably conforming to hieratic 

memoranda supplied to the draughtsman. 

^ Both these sashes ( ?) are called iskn ( ^ ~ ^ ), fairly obviously a foreign word, as might be expected for a 

Syrian article of dress. 

^ These sticks are named the colour see Davies, Paintings. Tomb of RekJmiire^, pl.ii. 

Cf. op. cit.y pi. 7. 




man was employed in both cases. Amunedjeh had a narrower interest in the north 
Syrian campaign as aide-de-camp to the king during its course, so that his design 
furnishes only the more commonplace features of the larger tomb. He follows Menkhe- 
perra^sonb of Tomb 86 in giving kilts to alternate Syrians; the simpler decoration he 
uses on them is more likely to be normal usage than the elaborate patterns in that 
tomb. The tribute of the South from Tomb 84 may be the subject of a similar article in 
the next issue of this Journal. 

( 99 ) 



In March 1930 the Rev. Dr. Colin Campbell of Callander sent to Professor F. LI. 
Griffith a photograph, taken ‘some years’ previously, showing two fragments of stone 
seen by Dr. Campbell in a dealer’s shop ‘in Egypt’, together with a rough copy of the 
text engraved on them. He added that ‘the dealer couldn’t tell where in Egypt it was 
found’. These materials Professor Griffith passed on to me. Later, with the kind assis- 
tance of Dr. Werner Peek of Berlin, I found that the epigram in question had been 
already published by Monsieur Theodore Reinach in Rev. et. gr. xxviii, 55-7 (cf. JEA 
VI, 217) from a squeeze supplied by Daninos Pasha; the stone, M. Reinach remarked, 
had recently been in the hands of an antique-seller at Luxor, and its Theban provenance 
was almost certain. 

On comparing the published text with that of the photograph I discovered to my 
surprise that, whereas the former comprised eleven lines in column I and a few letters 
of a twelfth, together with the opening letters of thirteen lines in column II, the photo- 
graph proves that the first column contains nineteen lines and the second the beginnings 
of nineteen more. It thus becomes evident that the squeeze read by Reinach was far 
from being complete, and this fact, not to speak of the corrections which must be made 
in his transcript, calls for a re-edition of the epigram, which is remarkable rather for its 
length^ than for its literary quality. 

The text of column I, so far as I have succeeded in reading it from the photograph, 
runs as follows : 

Trdrep, et jie iroOel^, pLerdOov rrjs XvTrrjs LK€r€vco, 
pTjTov yap Sdvos rjv rov9^ oTrep elSa (fydos* 
tcr{^ 6 yt 8e Tovro aa(f>a)g on rovro 7 T€ 7 Tpo)pi€vov rjv pLot 
yewrjOevTiy Oavelv eiKoat rrplv ireojv. 

5 ^Eyyv£ fiev valco A7]pi7]TpL0v rov ^tAaScA^ou, 
vvv rov tcrov rovrcot ywpov dXvTTOv ^ytoVj 
Tj XrjOrj §6 /x’ erravcre aa<j>cj^s xiaXyerro^v 8e pLepip^voov . 

Eol 8e TrapatverLKCog rovro ^ rrdrepy TTpoXeyw, 

Set yap rrdvrag vtto <f>9Lpi€voLg ^coovg Kara^ijvai' 

10 7^ yovv piOL 7r€L9ir]j /cat ov jucreA^e yocvv, 

pLTjrpl (f)cXrjv 8e TrapalvcL to rag XvTrag d77o0€a0at* 
rjy^Lrat 86 ppor(Zv narSapidrcop [o xpIotoj. 

Tovro 8e crot rrepiTToj 7TapapLv9L[ov oj]? drt dXvTTcog 
pr^rojg €a;(a rpvcf^-^v rrplv clg pi dmAuaaf 

J In Philologus, Lxxxviii, 142, W. Peek claims a thirn’-line grave-epigram from Itanus, in E Crete, as the 
longest metrical epitaph hitherto known. 



15 yap acjyOovlav irapd aor [aTrdvijv ov pi€pLd 97 ]Ka, 

ovSe 7 T 0 T iv ^toTOJL pioydoy [ccAutto]? 

Sol Se y[€v]oLTo ^10 lv /cat Ao[ TiJpo/cojat^etv. 

TId)s §6 a’ iydj Trelaco /caAo reXevrdv; 

Ataa pLOVov ^cot]s 7 Tp\ aOelv. 

‘O father, if thou mournest for me, put from thee thy grief, I beseech thee, for this light which I have 
seen was my appointed loan ; but know thou this assuredly, that this was allotted me by fate at my 
birth, that I should die before reaching twenty years. I dwell near to Demetrius who loves his 
brother well, and now I occupy the same painless region as he, and forgetfulness has assuredly 
relieved me from grievous cares. But to thee, father, I proclaim this by way of exhortation. All 
living men must needs go down to the dead beneath ; so, if thou wilt obey me, do thou too cease from 
lamentations and exhort my dear mother to put aside her griefs. Time the all-conquering is the 
ruler of mortals. But this I send thee to console thee, that without pain I enjoyed luxury, as was 
appointed, before removing to Hades. For with thee I had abundance; I have not learned want, nor 
do I, free from pain, ever have hardship in life. But may it befall thee to live and to make further 
progress in days to come ! And how shall I persuade thee , . . 

Reinach’s chief variants, apart from punctuation and accentuation, are as follows. 
In 1 . 3 he wrote taoiSe (sic), which he took as representing etutSe: but there can be no 
doubt that the third letter is a 0 the cross-bar of which has been accidentally omitted, 
as was pointed out by A. Pallis in Rev, et. gr, xxviii, 375. In 1 . 10 Reinach wrote 'qyow, 
which he admitted that he could not understand, and suggested as an alternative 
^ yovv. Aly yovv (= d yovv) was anticipated by G. V[ollgrafF] in Mnemosyne, XLVii, 
54; but rj y (= et y) ovv is also possible. In 1 . ii Reinach read Tidpaive Trepas Xviras, 
calling attention to the ‘barbarism’ ndpaive, but the reading vapatvei to ray XvTras is clear 
in the photograph. In 1 . 12 Reinach gave 17. ..v va ott . 

In 1 . 7 the engraver wrote xXaeTrojv instead of ^aAe/rcov. 

The iota mutum is regularly added ( 1 . 6 rouToit, 1. 16 ^lotcol), for the rretOT] of 1 . 10 is 
probably written for netdeL rather than for TretOrj, as rj for el in the same line. 

Metrical errors are frequent. In 1 . 1 rijs, in 1 . 1 1 t 6 , are metrically redundant, and in 1 . 5 
AijpLTjTplov transgresses against the metre, unless this is, as Vollgraff suggested {loc. cit.), 
an example of synizesis. L. 14, which should be a pentameter, is a hexameter, while 
11 . 17, 18 are both hexameters. Among the grammatical forms appearing in the poem 
we may note elha (1. 2), ea^a (1. 14), Tjxa (1- 15), and ^lotv (1. 17), unless this last is intended 
for ^lov. 

The writing is crude and unskilled, giving the impression of having been scratched 
with a pointed tool rather than engraved with a chisel. The letter-forms used are 


but S occurs sporadically ( 11 . 1, 3), and once ( 1 . 3) (U is used in place of W . Reinach regards 
this capricious writing as indicating a transitional period, probably the reign of Hadrian. 

The extant portion of the epigram is devoted almost wholly to a single theme, the 
consolation of the parents bereaved of their son. No mention is made either of their 
names or of his, though that of a brother, Demetrius, who had previously died, is 
recorded in 1. 5; the dead man and his parents were, we may assume, named in the 



latter part of the poem. The inescapable nature of death and the all-mastering power of 
fate are emphasized in its earlier portion, and with these thoughts two others are asso- 
ciated, that of the union of the two brothers in the same ‘painless region’, where forget- 
fulness banishes care (11. 6, 7), and that of the comfort enjoyed by the dead youth while 
still living in his father’s home (11. 13-16). 

The topic of death’s inevitability is common among the Greek tomb-epigrams and 
enters into many of the consolatory decrees {i/i-qtplaixaTa T 7 apaiJ.v 6 ->]TiKd), of which 
numerous examples have come down to us, chiefly, but not solely, from the island of 
Amorgos.' In these we find recurrent phrases like ixoipidLoj? e-rreaev e-l -rre-pcop^eW/v 
I elp.apixevrji’ (^IG XII (7), 53 [” SIG 889]- II)) ™ enLardaa , [ 7 } a]7Ta[/)eJ'r''?"0S' 

elp.apiJ.€vrj aTTijyayev (^IG XII (7)) 54 " i dviqXeovs Kai aTTapcuTi^TOV elpiapp.iv\rji\ 

al<j>vlhiov dvrjpTTaaraL Kal d- 7 TeXt]Xv 0 ev [dv]\dp<I)~u)v i^lbld. 51. 4), rd vvv vtto ttjj / 3 a pelai Kal dXy^Oojg 
diTjXeovs'qs e^rip-aa-ai j Kal d-evijpeKTai e| dvdpo'jTTOJV {ibid. 4IO. I3), d-rrapaLTrjTds ioriv r) 
eVt ndvra'v dvOpcoTTOJV chpia' p.evrj p.olpa{lbld. 396 [= A/G866]. 32; cf. 24O. 23, 399. 15, 4OI. 5, 
408. 9). But a special poignancy attaches to the deaths of those carried off in youth 
or in the flower of their age, and this is often emphasized, as in the poem before us or 
in an epigram of Heracleum (Crete), 

ov TO davLV dXyeu’dv, irrel to ye Molpa irreKXcoae, 
dXXd TTplv rjXiKia^ Kal yoGcor rrpOTepav 

(Philologus, Lxxxviii, 144; cf. Kaibel, Epigrammata graeca, 198), and in two of the con- 
solatory decrees just mentioned, dTr-pyayev veojTe[pov^ irrapyovTa eTwv P.' {IG XII (7), 54. 

13 )) St) TOI' TratSa, TTplv rj tt) twv dvd[pd>v] j 7]XiKLa TTpoaeXOeiv, [roji's' Trjs dTrapaiTi'iTov TreTr[pcoy pe- 

V7]s dvavKaloLs [iro/xjois- iTraydevTa e^ dvOpwiTToiv drreXOeLv. The Same thought probably Under- 
lies a short epitaph from Gerasa, Qdpaei 'ATroXXojvLdy] , dojpe eT(aji ) s", ( yeveaei ■' xeipaydels : 
dTreOaves- ; evi^vx^i. {SEG VII, 904 ; C. H. Kracling, Gerasa, 455, No. 230), as interpreted 
by L. Robert, Melanges Bidez, 793 f. 

I add a few notes on words or phrases of interest. 

L. I. MeTaOov Ti]s Xvttt]s Caused some difficulty to Reinach, who commented: 
'MeTaTidevai avec Ic gcnitif signifie ‘changer de’, ce qui ne repond pas exactement a la 
pensee de I’auteur.’ According to Liddell & Scott peTOTldepai means ‘change what is 
one’s own’ or ‘for oneself’, ‘change one’s opinion’, ‘retract’, ‘change sides’. It usually 
governs an accusative (vd/wv^, T-ly 86 (av, Tovvopa, t 6 v TpoTov, See.), but Appian writes Trjs 
yvdiprjs peTaTlOeaOai {Bell. Glv. Ill, 29), and in the present instance Xv-r-qs may represent 
a partitive genitive or a genitive of separation. The meaning is plainlv ‘set aside your 
grief’; cf. Philologus, Lxxxvil, 230 TrevOos dTToaTplcf>eTe, which Peek renders ‘klaget nicht’. 
Slightly different is the professed object of a decree of Aegiale (Amorgos), to lead the 
relatives and friends of the deceased awpeTpajs ra Tijs Xvttijs {IG xii (7), 396. 31). 

L. 2. The conception of life as a revocable loan appears also in a Roman epitaph, 
TTvevpa Xa^ojv Sdvos ovpavodev TeXeaas xP°rov avT drredojKa {IG XIV, 200o). Life is veiA' often 
represented under the image of light, d>dos {SEG ii, 874. 3; IG vii, 2541 (cf. Hermes, 
Lxxii, 236 ff.); Ath. Mitt. LVi, 121), {IG xiv, 1915. 7; Philologus, LXXXVii, 236 {bis)\ 

‘ On this class of document see K. Buresch, Rhein. Mus. XLix, 424 ff., SIG 796 B note 6, and O. Gomvald 
Comment, V indob, iii, 5 fF. 



Ath. Mitt. LVI, 126), 4'^yyos (SEG VIII, 369, 3, 372. 4), or aeXas (SEG VIII, 502 a 3). 
’PriTos (p-nrcus) is a favourite word with our author, who uses it also in 11. 14, 21, 29; in 
meaning it approaches the KSKpcfievov of SEG l, 573 6(XL)yov xpo^ov K€{K)pipLcvov. For 
the idea of fate (to TrevpcopL^ov, rj elixapp.^, ataa, pLotpaj as determining death see the 
quotations given above from the consolatory decrees of Amorgos. 

L. 4. With yewiqdevTL cf. Philologus, Lxxxvii, 232 yei.vop.eva). Hplv, which may be 
metrically long (as here and in 1. 14) or short (as in the above-quoted epigram of 
Heracleum; Ath. Mitt, lvi, 121, 129; SEG viii, 497. i), not infrequently appears as a 
preposition governing a genitive (e.g. in Ath. Mitt, lvi, 129 rrplv wpas). Death at twenty 
years is regarded as untimely [dojpos) in SEG viii, 484 (cf. i, 567; viii, 482). 

L. 5. A further source of comfort is the fact that the deceased is now reunited with 
his brother Demetrius in the realm where grief and anxiety are unknown. The epithet 
^lAaSeA^os- refers to the love borne by Demetrius to his brother, which guarantees the 
warmth of his w^elcome to the new-comer. Reinach comments on 1 . 5 thus : ‘Vers faux. 
II serait juste avec nroXepalov (au lieu de ArjprjTpiov) et c’est peut-etre ce nom qu’on 
lisait dans le modele demarque par notre auteur. Mais s’agissait-il vraiment du roi 
Ptolemee II Philadelpher’ But even if A-qp-r^rpLov is not regarded as an example of 
synizesis, and therefore metrically unexceptionable, slight departures from metrical 
correctness are very common with proper names, and any reference to Ptolemy 
Philadelphus seems to me to be in the highest degree improbable. In an Alexandrian 
grave-epigram (SEG vili, 374. 7 f.) the word recurs, 

[to]? Kayo) (f>LXdSeX(f>os eojv Kal Traai TToAetTai? 

XprjaTOs iKoipijOrjv TrXrjoiov alpoyevcXv. 

L. 7. Reinach writes A-qdy], I prefer X-qd-q. The same doubt attaches to a line in an 
epitaph of Leontopolis (SEG viii, 482. 9 ff.), 

rioaaaerTqs S’ ojXiaOas xmo OKoroev KXlpa AdOas; 

and in another from Naucratis (Hermes, Lxvi, 331), 

dXXd ae irpos Ad0as dvLoxrjaav eSos 

(cf. Ath. Mitt. LVI, 1 19; Philologus-, lxxxvii, 237). Occasionally the reference to the 
River Lethe admits of no doubt, as in Ath. Mitt. LVi, 132, 

0epae<j)6vas Se dSlavXov xmo OTvyepdv Sopov rjXdov 
TTavaxTTova) Addas Xovaapeva TTopari. 

The Se before pepxpvwv is otiose and is inserted merely metri gratia. A Roman 
epitaph (IG XIV, 1729) speaks of the dead as diroTTpoXiTTOvaa peplpvag TrevKeSavoXo pLOV. 

L. 8. TJpoXeyo) is here used of a formal and emphatic utterance rather than of fore- 
telling; a similar use is that in IG XIV, 1409 ds -npoXeyex dvarols ev(f>poaxjv7]s perexeiv. 

L. 9. Again the thought of the inevitableness of death is stressed. Zojol is a frequent 
alternative for ^porol (e.g. in Philologus, Lxxxviii, 145 ; Hesperia, vii, 473 ; Ath. Mitt. 
LVI, 122), as is (f>9lpevoi for veKpol (e.g. in Philologus, lxxxvii, 231; SEG viii, 367. 2; 
IG VII, 2541; XIV, 1857. 6, 1915. 6). Reinach remarks that ^vtto est bizarre’; but the 
preposition is a natural one to indicate descent to the world below, and the strangeness 
lies rather in the use of the dative (fxdipevoLs in place of the more normal accusative (as in 



Ath. Mitt. LVI, 132, quoted above); perhaps the dative is preferred because the thought 
is that not merely of descending to, but also of dwelling in, the nether world. 

L. 10. With TTeldr) of. SEG VIII, "768. 22 jUi) rpv)(ead^ eir' eixots a-)(9\€~\ cri Treidofievov. MereXOe 
y6o)v is, I think, preferable to Reinach’s pereXOe ■yo\^'\v and must, in view of the context, 
denote ‘desist from lamentations’, though I can find no parallels for this use of neripyoiiai, 
which can, however, mean ‘migrate’, ‘change one’s abode’ ; the word here seems very 
similar in meaning and construction to the iieTarLdepiaL of 1. i. Cf. SEG viii, 369. 4 

TTarpl XiTTOVora yoovg, 

L. II. From the father’s grief we turn momentarily to that of the mother, which 
the father is bidden to assuage. The verb napacveco rightly governs the dative p-'^rpC, 
and the use of the accusative 4>lXrjv agreeing with it is a serious error of grammar or of 
engraving. The to is redundant both metrically and grammatically, but it may have 
been meant to produce a phrase in the accusative somewhat like the to5t’ of /G ix (i), 
883. I Tovt Eiiohos PpoToiai Tram -napaivo}. 'AiroOeaOai, rCCUrS clsCwhere of gricfs (Kaibcl, 
Epigrammata, 298. 6 airodov 6vp.o8aK€ls dSuW?) or other burdens (ibid. 710 dnobov ^6prov 

ohoLTTOpiiqs) . 

L. 12. The Se is weak; we should rather have expected ydp. The phrase iravha- 
p-drajp xpdvos recurs in an Ephesian epigram, Kaibel, Epigrammata, 1050. 4, and perhaps 
xpdvos is understood in the epitaph from Cairo, now at Gottingen, Sammelbuch, 5765 
{cf. P. Jacobsthal, Hermes, XLVi, 318 ff.), 

7TevTrjKo[v)ra rptojv iriojv kvkXov dvvcravra 
avTO? 6 TravSapdrajp 'qprraaev els ^AtSrjv, 

though it is fate rather than time which is usually regarded as man’s master, as in Ath. 

Mitt. LVI, 1 19 [djrt T(x)v vravTcop MoZpa Kparel ye pLopy].^ 

L. 13. The bereaved father is further comforted by the reminder that his son, while 
yet alive, had been treated by him with unstinting generosity. I restore 7rapafjivdi[op (L]s 
with some hesitation; but there is room for three, or at most four, letters between the 
I and the s, and the word following Trapap.v9i[op should metrically be a monosyllable 
beginning with a vowel or diphthong. 'Ds may go pleonastically with 6 tl, or we may 
write tos", translating This I send thee as a solace . and Trapa^v^ta are frequent 
in the consolatory- decrees {IG 83. 13, 84. 39, 44, 86. 23 ; v (2), 517. 14; xii (7), 53. 20, 
54. 16, 239. 37, 394. 10, 20, 399. II, 400. 9), while Trapap.v9Lop occurs in several grave- 
epigrams, e.g. IG III, 768 a; Festgabe T. Wiegand dargebracht,2,i-, Kaibel, Epigrammata, 

298. 7 'Ajs e-n epLol Xvrrr]; ■7TapafjLv9iop epL cfypeal 9ea9e tovtop, and Ath. Mitt. LVI, II9, 

SrriXy], TLs a eunqaev apiTTpeirecos eaopdaOai ; 

M'lqrrip \ TeLpLOKpdrovs, exf] Trapafivdiov airrij, 
pvT]aK€\adaL ^waa eov tckvolo TrpoaojTTov. 

On this last line Peek comments ‘fiir sollte ^ijaaaa . . . stehen’. But the present 

* In this epigram I should prefer rdv^pl to Peek's t dvSpl, since it is a case of crasis rather than of elision. In 
the same article, p. 1 22, (fxaperprjcfxopov I6v should be cfiaperpric^opov toV, for the arrow does not bear, but is borne by, 
the quiver. On p. 128 Peek publishes the Thespian epitaph of a woman of eighteen who had died apyiroKoiail 
whelaiv and comments : 'dpxiroKos ist nur in einer boiotischen Inschrift AM. 5, 1880, 127 belegt, dort in anderer 
Bedeutung: dpxiroKoj ovroj dpyvploj (fehlt bei Liddell & Scott)', unaware that the inscription was republished 
in IG VII, 1738, where the editor rightly reads dpyi tokcd ovtw toj dpyvploj. 



participle is required and the aorist is intolerable; if, therefore, any change is to be 
made, I would suggest lw{ov)aa} 

L. 14. Tpv(f)-q and rpvcfid) are common in tomb-epigrams, e.g. Kaibel, Epigrammata, 
261. 19, 344. 3, 362. 5, 387. 2, 4, 614. I. 'AvaXvoj occurs elsewhere also to describe the 
soul’s migration at death to the nether world, as in Kaibel, Epigrammata, 340. 7 k hk 

deoug dveXvaa ddavaroiai pereLpi, 7 1 3. 2 Trdjg poL PejStojTm Kal TTtog dveXvaa. 

L. 15. Probably four or five letters are lost after o-ot. No satisfactory restoration 
occurs to me on the basis of - - vov or of - - v oS, but [airdrijv ov gives a word of the 
requisite length and provides a sharp contrast to dcfiOovlav. The asyndeton is, however, 
somewhat harsh, and pepddrjKa must be taken to mean ‘I have experienced’. 

L. 16. Again the proposed restoration must be accepted with reserve, as it is offered 
with diffidence. There seem to be five letters missing, of which the first must, for 
metrical reasons, be a vowel; nor is it hard to believe that once more the writer had 
recourse to dXvTTog, already used in 11. 6, 13. 

L. 17. The dead son, it would seem, wishes his father continued life and prosperity, 
but the restoration is difficult. The meaning assigned to TTpoKopt^to by Liddell and Scott is 
‘bring forward’, ‘produce’, or, in the passive, ‘to be carried on before’, ‘to be borne in 
procession’. Here, if ^loIv is an irregular form of, or an engraver’s error for, ^lovv, 
'TTpoKOjuiew must be intransitive and bear some such meaning as ‘progress’, ‘prosper’. I 
had thought of Awfiov en 7T\poKopil,eLv or X(p[tr€pov TrjpoKopl^eLv, but the letter following A is 
curved and the form of oj used almost everywhere in this inscription is rectilinear; so 
I suggest Ap[: 770 F eVt (or iv) TrjpoKopl^eiv. On the other hand, if jdioLv is an error for ^lov, 
we may read Kal Ap[t7Tov eVt n]poKop[^eiv, retaining the transitive force of the verb 

and translating the phrase ‘still to prolong your life in days to come’. 

L. 18. It is not clear of what the dead wishes to persuade his father. Is it that, after 
all, death in youth is a blessing rather than a disaster ? If so, we might restore /<:aAp[v wg 
vlov ovra] reXeurdv; or /caAp[v efrat cSSe (or t 5 /<a)] reXevrdv; 

L. 19. This line wholly baffles me, and I attempt no restoration or interpretation. 
The last letter partially preserved before the gap may be i or oj, and the concluding 
letters probably belong to TraOelv or paOelv. 

Of the remaining nineteen lines little need or can be said, for only the opening 
letters of each survive. I give my readings from the photograph, which are somewhat 
fuller than those of Reinach. 

L. 20. TOVTO yap g 

L. 21. prjTwgydp — Of the last letter only the down-stroke survives. 

L. 22. T] yap iraS — The engraver wrote I • r. The initial letter, almost certainly t], 
may represent 17 (so Reinach) or rj or even rj (= d). 

L. 23* KXalojv av 

L. 24. aAAa Oeol Rcinach gives 6 €o[ 

L. 25. 17? veoTT] Reinach writes v€6r7][ros , but I can see no trace of the 

horizontal bar of a T at the beginning of the line, where I read l - C. 

L. 26. p The last letter may be jS, 

1 Cf. BCH XLVH, 95 ^wovaa^ IG xii (8), 600. 9 ^cjovac, Bull. Soc. Arch. Bulg. vn, 13 ^cLojv. 



L. 27* ^Si7 yap I 

L. 28. Tltolvov Reinach gives TlTANOY[ . If the engraver has not blundered, 

I see no alternative to taking the first five letters as Tirdv, which is metrically a spondee, 

L. 29. pr]rws p The last letter is doubtful and may be / 3 . 

L. 30. icrdi Se K - - - 

L. 31. et Se / 3 ag- This is very uncertain. Reinach read el Se /3a[ , but eiSe is 

also possible, the 8 might be A, the a might also be A, and the a- might be o or e. 

L. 32. v/ii€ts' € The last letter may be 0 , 

L. 33. OpTo 

L. 34 ' — 

L. 35. pir]Ke Probably ;U7]K-e'[Tt 

L. 36- ev 6 v 

L. 37. The first two letters are mutilated, but the second is probablv A; the third is e. 
L. 38. i'€K Possibly i'e;<-[Tap 

Below are some marks on the stone, which might possibly be the survivors of a thirty- 
ninth line, but on the whole I regard them as accidental scratches. 





In a number of Late-Egyptian texts, some of which belong to our old stock of philo- 
logical material, occurs a group inn that has always embarrassed translators, 

grammarians, and lexicographers. Erman^ hesitatingly declared it to be an interjection, 
and Spiegelberg followed him by rendering it as eh bien, ah, or aie.^ With the appear- 
ance of new texts the number of examples has increased greatly, and it has gradually 
become clear that this group represents several words of quite distinct origin and 
meaning. To Spiegelberg^ belongs the merit of first segregating the ancestor of the 
Coptic pronoun j^non ‘we’, ‘us’; that was in 1904, and as late as 1911 Gardiner^ had 
no better explanation for the remaining examples than to interpret them all as ‘so said 
we’, the first pers. plur. of the well-known expression " -f suffix. Strangely enough, 
the Berlin dictionary^ registers only the pronoun inn. Ten years agoPeef^ undertook 
to classify all instances then available, and following, if I remember rightly, a suggestion 
of mine, he recognized a further word inn ‘if’ and yet another which he took to be an 
alternative writing of the post-positive negatival complement the Coptic &.«. 

The second edition of Erman’s Neudgyptische Grammatik ignored the progress made by 
Peet and, whilst acknowledging the existence of inn ‘we’, ‘us’ (§ 102), still adhered to 
the old theory of inn as an interjection (§ 688). 

Quite recently I have come across some new and interesting passages which go far 
towards clearing up the various meanings, and for that reason it is perhaps worth while 
to re-classify all the material, the more so since Peet’s inn = i{w)n{i) proved non- 
existent and can be replaced by an explanation that admits of no doubt. The indepen- 
dent pronoun inn is included in the following collection because the examples of it have 
not been assembled in any of the usual books of reference. 

I. inn ‘we’, ‘us’, Coptic e^noit 

For this the only authority used to be Erman’s Ag. Gr., 3rd ed,, p. 84, where the un- 
published Kamak inscription (below, i) was quoted; his Neudg. Gr., 2nd ed., § 102, 
adds one more example, the Abusir graffito (below, 2). Wb. gives three examples with- 
out noticing that the last two are identical. Gard., Eg. Gr., p. 53, n. 10, quotes Erman, 
Ag. Gr., and W. M. Muller in OLZ xv, 452; the latter gives the spelling as 

’ [At my friend Cemy’s wish and suggestion I have edited this paper somewhat drastically, and part of the 
responsibility for it, though none of the credit for its admirable conclusions, must therefore rest upon me. — 

2 Neudg. Gr.y ist ed., § 142. 

3 In the translations given in his Correspondances du temps des rots prStres, 43, 44, 70, 76. 

^ Rec. Trav. xxvi, 153. 5 Egyptian Hieratic Texts y 20*, n. 8. 

^ Wb. I, 97, 5, 6. 7 The Great Tomb-Robberies , 164, n. 55. 


‘spat, aber gut belegt’; no reference is given, but the Old-Demotic P. Rylands IX is 
evidently meant, see Griffith, Ryl. Pap. ill, 329. 

(1) Unpublished stela of Ramesses IV on the east side of the Court north of Pylon VII 

of Karnak, 11 . 5-6:' S^rvil made the titu- 

lary and the cartouche (mns) before the reign of the righteous ruler.’ (‘Righteous ruler’, 
hki MfCt, is a quotation from the prenomen Hki-mict-Rc of Ramesses IV.) 

(2) Hieratic graffito in the mastaba of Ptahshepses at Abusir, published by Spiegel- 
berg, Rec. Trav. xxvi, 153: ( ‘We, 
the scribes of Ptah, our father, will say it to him.’ 

(3) So too probably the damaged example Anast. VIII, i, 18; . . . i ; 

• • [these] two men of ours.’ 

In hieratic the higher of the two . is sometimes surmounted by two strokes that 
warrant the transcription or, by omission of ,:4” : 

(4) P. Leyden yyo, vs. 7-8 = Late Ramesside Letters, ii, 1-2: 

I ! iTiii ! look after these three zW6-fields of ours.’ 

(5) P. Brit. Mns. J0052, 3, 7-8 = Peet,T'omiRo66erze5, pis. 26-7: iiji ^ 

‘^od he gave us four shares, to the four of us also.’ 

(6) P. Brit. Mus. 10052, 10, 6 = Peet, op. cit., pi. 31: 

i\iT! ‘"To us belongs this coffin belonging to our rich people.’^ The construc- 
tion seems clear, but the sense is obscure. 

Finally, an early Nineteenth Dynasty spelling p™ occurs: 

(7) Unpublished ostracon 113 of the Oriental Institute, Chicago University,^ vs. 7-8: 

Yn . I (] 

, 111 I I:; 

are in extreme miseryq all the things of ours which come from the Treasury, from the 
Granary, and from the Magazine being neglected.’ 

II. (j ‘so said we’ 

(8) P. MayerJ. 6: 'iSVSi 

‘We said to him: “We will take you (to) the place where [we] found 
it and you shall fetch away (some) for yourself as well.” So said we to him.’ 

There seems only one more passage which could possibly admit of a similar inter- 
pretation : 

^ jq) Anast. 

I I '] 1 IM 1 ‘Do not make the commander 

angr}\ Long is the march in front of us. So we said. What means it, that there is no (?) 
bread at all? Our night-quarters are far off.'^^ 

1 ^ A 

^ See Rec. Trav. xxxi, pi. 2 opposite p. 176. The Plate is illegible, but I am able to quote from a copy by 
Mile Ch. Desroches, verified with an excellent photograph kindly supplied by Dr. Nelson. 

- The reading ^ instead of Feet's ^ ^ "*1^ was communicated to me by Mr. B. H. Strieker on the basis 
of a good photograph. [I would suggest ‘This coffin belongs to us and to our rich people’. — A.H.G.] 

^ I am greatly indebted to Dr. Nelson for permitting me to study and quote this ostracon. 

^ [Cerny has not emancipated himself sufficiently from my old translation. ‘So we said’ makes very poor 
sense, and by one means or another inn here must surely be taken as the pronoun. Perhaps read n for [bln 
and render ‘What bread have we at all?’ — A.H.G.] 



III. 1);^= ‘if’ 

(a) Followed by sdm-f or its negative correlative bzvpwf sdm. 

(lo) P. Leyden 370, j~g = Late Ramesside Letters, g, 11-12: 

‘If has finished gathering in 

the barley, you shall receive it . . . and you shall enter it into its granary.’ 

^ ^ jjj) P. Mayer A, 2, 14-15 : = £=, If i .T.’Sv.v ^ l"i: ¥ 

Iw e ^ ‘They are just the people whom I saw. If gold has been collected, it is they 
who know (about it).’ 

(12) P. Brit. Mus. loioo, 14-15 = Late Ramesside Letters, 50, 16-51, 2: ^ 

J(?D(? , A ‘And if 

you have not received them, you shall go to the place where Hrere is and shall receive 
them from her.’ 

^(13) Ostr. Berlin 10628, 4 == Hier. Pap. aiis . . . Berlin, iii, pi. 39: 

‘If you have not written on the 
papyrus, let it be brought to me; I am in a hurry for it.’ 

(b) Followed by the pseudo-verbal construction infinitive or + old perfective. 


► I 

(14) P. Bibl. Nat. ig8, ii, 12 = Late Ramesside Letters, 68, 2: ^ 

‘And if you say : Out from here! I shall be a Inapassageof 

extreme difficulty. 

(15) Ostr. Der el-Medinah Inv. no. 1082, vs. 3, in a damaged context: 

; ‘And if I give (or cause). . . .’ 

(16) Ostr. Edgerton i, 11. 2-3 : ‘Send twenty deben of copper to pay for [mh) your she- 

donkey in money; = 7. and if you do not give 

them, let my she-ass be returned to me.’ In a letter written by a woman. 

(17) P. Bibl. Nat. ig8, iii, vs. 3 = Late Ramesside Letters, 69, 15: (]^,7,^<UPI5»ovv 

‘If your orders are too many for 

you, you will not be able to walk in (i.e. accomplish) this order from Pharaoh.’ 

(18) Ostr. Cairo, Cat. gen. 25672: 

A<?5P 7(?l^*7l3?i<2=.[^]i7 rvv&i ‘If tho seals are intact, search for them. Give them 
to their keepers by to-morrow.’' The context is obscure. 

(c) Followed by the future izvf (r) sdm. 

(19) P. Brit. Mus. 10032, 12, 17-18 = Peet, Tomb Robberies, pi. 32: 


7^^ ‘Ho said, I have seen nothing, (but) if you 

bid (me) lie, I will lie.’ [Lit., ‘if you will say: “Lie” ’.] 

(20) P. Mayer A, 8, 8, identical with the preceding, but in the 2nd person plur. : 

‘If you bid me lie, I will lie.’ 

(21) P. Brit. Mus. 10032, II, 12 = Peet, Tomb Robberies, pi. 32: ^ Jp'T’n 

‘If (I) am to be put to death on account of somebody, 

Vi iii; 

that is my penalty.’ 

(22) P. Brit. Mus. 10032, 8, 5 = Peet, op. cit., pi. 30: 

: “,i 'sx 

_/v<A/>.VN 33: t<=.^ A- XI 

tombs of Gebelen, those are the ones in which I was.’ 

* [Perhaps rather : 'search them out in company with their keepers, and deliver them by to-morrow/ — A.H.G.] 

I t 1 I ^ A- 

‘If I ^ui to be put to death on account of the 



(23) P. Mayer B, 4-5; ^ 

^ ywww^ I ~ ^ ’ ^ i::) I i 1 - /dLv ' 1 ^ ^ '~jyJi- 'S J\ <=> 

'As for the silver which you found, if you will not give 
me (any) of it, I will go and tell it to the Prince of the West.’ 

(d) Followed by the emphatic iir-f sdm, apparently with present meaning, but prob- 
ably with a nuance which escapes us ; 

^ ^ the prince who has reported to the Ruler; 

iTIra &c. If you are rejoicing concerning this (tomb) 

in which you have been . . ., yet [King] Sekhemrec-shedtawe, Son of Rec, Sebkemsaf, 
has been desecrated.’ 

5 == Tomb Robberies, pi. 33 ; ‘And I said to them: 

I A /I ■ .CZi^ 7 If you sav this 

to me regarding this young sailor, behold, he took them.’ 

(26) P. Brit. Mas. loyjy, vs. i = Late Ramesside Letters, 46, 16-47, ^ ■ ,Ti " 

" y' ^ ' " ' "N*, n W I . 3 — _I ^ ^ -=~ '~~ZP i TP 1 

I I I f ,c^ ; iT As J 7 7:)<^ ^ It we do not work 

for you as we would have wished (?), we shall write to let our lord know.’ 

(e) Followed by + substantive, where wn means ‘there is’ and is the equivalent 
of hliddle Egyptian (j j^£S..i 

(27) Anast.I,i 8 ,y-^: ‘I am a scribe, a Alaher, vou retort. ,fj 

^ 1! ' rrr^, ^ - -- - - 

you may be tested.’ 

(/)- Followed by 


I ‘S lid I 

7^ If there is truth in what you have said, come forth that 
-substantive, an extension of use (e). 

{2ja) Adoption Papyrus, vs. 7-9, published JEA xxvi, pi. ya: '.^yy 

“ ■'I 'Vi 
i_ 'lid' 

, , T7 


s "fl 

y- ^ 

' I#, ‘If I have fields in the country', if I have anything in the 

world, if I have merchandise, they shall be divided among my four children.’ 

{g) For completeness’ sake I quote from damaged contexts three examples which I 
dare not classify more closely: 

(28) Anast.I,ii,y: jg] 


y I 1 I ^ ; D . 

' ^ -=s V 

i ^ W AA 

t7 = 

O — :7 A " I 1; A 

X is, ^ j ll '‘TIT 

[ 'N]y^ 


Gardiner trans- 

I -I , ,9! i .' i-a-' ^ ^ 

lated ‘Tell me what thou knowest (of them). Then shall I answer thee: Beware lest thv 
fingers approach hieroglyphs. So say I: . . . as when . . . sits to play draughts.’ 

(29) Anast. VI, = Gardiner, Late-Egyptian Miscellanies, 76, i: ,£1,— ^2,,,™"- 


2 sq. 

^ 'V 

(30) Ostr. Nash 5, 10: 

IV. ~ ' ‘if’, ‘whether’ in indirect questions 
(31) P. Leyden J70, vs. 14 = Late Ramesside Letters, ii, 9-10: 1,77^ ' 
P ,r_ ‘And you shall write to me whether you have handed 
barleys to him.’ 

over Hori’s 

■ [See, too, below no. 29.] ; [Added by A.H.G.] 

■' [Surely to be placed under (c) above. The example is interesting as illustrating the stage from which ( /) 
arose, the preposition m-di not yet being placed before the real subject of ten. — A.H.G.] 



V. ‘except’ 

This hitherto unknown meaning emerges from the following examples:^ 

(32) Adoption Papyrus, rt. 19-20, published xxvi, pi. 6a. A lady speaks of three 
children of a slave woman whom she brought up as her own, and after pointing out 
their exemplary kindness to herself she adds: p p ^ ^ .T; ^ rp - 
T not having (lit. there not being) (any) son or daughter except them.’ 

(33) P. Mayer A, 11,21 and 13, C. 9 give a woman’s name which, after slight correc- 
tion of Feet’s transcription, reads • This must surely mean 

‘There is no one but Ma^et’, i.e. ‘Truth’.- 

(34) Gardiner has shown me a small fragment of papyrus in his possession, probably 

from a Nineteenth or Twentieth Dynasty letter. This has as the last line of its text and 
followed by a blank space the words • Gardiner proposes 

to restore front of these words, and to render ‘[There is no one] here 

except Phamnute’ or, less probably, ‘the prophet’. This suggestion agrees well with 

no. 33. 

(35) P. Mallet, 3,8 = Rec. Trav. i, 47 flF. ‘Get these thousand (pieces) of wood and 
fifty sacks of charcoal ready in accordance with what I said to you; 
ci I have no wood in store except my yearly tax.’ 

?i T will not pardon you for this great fault you have com- 
mitted except (through) the quantity of commissions I have told you to perform.’ 

The etymologies of inn ‘we’, ‘us’ and of in-n ‘so said we’ being known, it remains 
only to search for those of inn ‘if’ and of inn ‘except’. It can be assumed a priori that if 
several different words are thus expressed by means of the same group of signs, this 
must be due to their pronunciation in Late Egyptian being at least approximately the 

The pronoun preserved in Coptic as e>.non ‘we’ provides a valuable clue to that pro- 
nunciation; it derives from *‘indn, where ‘i>d 2& {e.g.) in *‘inupew > xito-yn. In-n ‘so 
said we’ points to the same vocalization: if it were a sdm-f of the verb in ‘say’, the 
vocalization could hardly have been other than *dn 6 'n > *an 6 n, since biconsonantal 
verbs form ‘mno-f and consequently, for the ist pers. plur., 'mno'n; but even if it is a 
sdm-n-f form of a verb ; i, as Faulkner has persuasively argued {JEA xxi, 177 fF.),^ 
the two — being always written side by side (the one the formative of the Mm-n-f form 
and the other the suffix-pronoun), it is certain that the accent must have fallen between 
them, and since Late Egyptian, like Coptic, has only one accentuated syllable, the 
vocalization ‘i-no-n seems the only one possible. Now so far as inn ‘if’, ‘whether’ in 
indirect questions (our category IV) is concerned, there can be no doubt that this is the 
same as the conditional inn ‘if’ (III), since the two are identical in many languages. Thus 

^ [In the unedited manuscript of this article Cemy generously, but incorrectly, ascribed to me some part 
in his brilliant discover^-. For that reason I have rewritten the section. — A.H.G.] 

- [I imagine this must mean: ‘There is no one (here, in this woman) except ^vla^et’, i.e. she is Ma^et in per- 
son. — A.H.G.] 

^ The sole objection I have is that this would be the only case of a unicons onantal verb. 



in T shall go, if you go too’ and in ‘Tell me if he came’ the ‘if’s are essentially the same, 
the latter sentence being conditional in origin and the injunction ‘Tell me’ becoming 
operative only on condition that the person really came. So too in Late Egyptian the 

conditional particle in,^ also written or is used in indirect questions- such as 

P. Bologna iog4, 5, 6 (= Gardiner, Late-Egyptian Miscellanies, 5, 8); 

*And look if he has come’; also 5 is used in both cases in Demotic. ^ 

Further, this of conditional clauses and of indirect questions is identical^ with 
the in introducing direct questions. ^ Both in conditional clauses and in questions it is 
sometimes followed by the verb impersonally used (‘it is’) and gradually combines 
with it into Coptic ene.^ 

Our ( 1 ^,^, inn cannot be a mere variant writing of either simple or of 
their probable pronunciation being *'n and *me respectively, while we have every reason 
to believe that ™ was pronounced *‘in6n \ but undoubtedly constitutes the first 
part of it, *’in-. The final syllable -on which remains I am inclined to consider as 
^(5 ion, its subject being constituted by the clause that follows. On this view (] 
would stand for in-vm, and for such a combination we have a good parallel in 

of unfolfilled condition; cf. P. Brit. Mus. 10403, 3, 29 (= Peet, Tomb 
Robberies, pi. 37): ‘If I had seen, I would have told 

you’; similarly op. cit., 3, 31. The combination *‘in-w6n ‘if it were that’ has lost the w, 
and that same phenomenon is observable in i^^nn wn, this becoming and 

then further Coptic B. The Coptic again confirms the vocalization 

*w6n of and the same vocalization is also found in B. o'ycu ‘it is’, S.A. o'yn. 

The above etymology cannot be rejected on account of Anast. I, 18, 4 (no. 27 above; 
[cf. also nos. 24a, 29]), where inn is followed by another ^ (j + substantive, so that wn 
seems to be put twice. The writing suffices of itself to prove that Egyptians 

were at a loss for its origin, but even had they been aware of it, they would have 
expressed ^<3 twice, the syntactic functions of both being different: ‘if it were there-is- 
truth-in-what-thou-sayest’ ; cf. also the double (|(p pointed out by Gardiner, PSBA 
XXXI, 13, n. 3. 

The combination in wn did not have a long life and is not found after Late Egyptian, 
its functions having been taken over in Demotic and Coptic by in iw. Nor is this dis- 
appearance astonishing, the similarly formed wn ‘for’ being another com- 

pound with wn that passed quickly out of use. 

It is by no means easy to reconcile the use of inn as ‘except’ (category V) with the 
meaning ‘if’, and there seems only one way to bridge over the gap which separates 

> Erman, Neuag. Gr., 2nd ed., § 818. For in in conditional clauses in Middle Egyptian, cf. Erman, Ag. Gr. 
4th ed., § 540. 

2 Erman, Neuag . Gr., 2nd ed., § 729. 

3 Spiegelberg, Dem, Gr., § 492 (indirect questions) and §§ 497-8. 

* Cf. Spiegelberg, op. cit,, § 498, note. 

5 Gardiner, Eg. Grammar, § 491, 3 and § 493 for Middle Egyptian; Erman, Neuag. Gr., 2nd ed., § 739 for 
Late Egyptian; Spiegelberg, op. cit., §§ 485-7 for Demotic. 

* Gardiner, op. cit., § 492; Erman, § 739; Spiegelberg, § 485 ff.; Steindorff, Kopt. Gr., 2nd ed., § 474. 

^ As suggested by Peet, Tomb Robberies, 164, n. 55. 

« It is possible too that iv has been assimilated to the n preceding; *Hn-n 6 n would of course be written inn. 



them ; namely to suppose for the first an original meaning ‘if not’, ‘if it were not’. ‘There 
is no one if not Ma'et’ (above no. 33) is practically the same as ‘There is no one except 
Ma^et’, but if we accept this explanation we should have to admit the presence of a 
negation inside inn. As a matter of fact Middle Egyptian expresses the idea ‘except’, 
‘if not’ by a negative adverbial clause, as in Westcar, ii, 10-12: 

‘What is that which we have come for,' if not to do 
wonders for the children?’ (lit. ‘ doing -wonders-for-the-children not being existent’). 
By analogy we should expect ‘There is no one, Ma'et not being existent’ or 

Instead of this we find !] O, rf",, and its well-established vocalization *Hn 6 n suggests that 
in cases where it stands in the meaning ‘if not’, ‘except’ it derives from *in-nn-wn, pro- 
nounced at that time *‘n-^n-‘u: 6 n or the like. The two ‘n were, of course, extremely apt 
to coalesce into one when not separated by the accent,- and if they did so in this case, 
the result would be a simple as though there were no negation at all. There 

would be no danger of confusion with the other meaning ‘if’, since (i) the ‘if not’ clause 
would follow the main clause, thus differing from the case of inn — ‘if’, where the 
conditional clause always precedes; (2) the main clause is always negative. This latter 
fact induced Peet in nos. 35, 3 6^ to make one sentence of inn and the preceding negative 
and to consider inn in such cases as a mere alternative writing of the negation ga, ^ . 


It was not until Cerny’s article was in the hands of the Printer that I realized how 
admirably his explanation of ‘if’ as from *3 ^ is borne out by an isolated con- 

struction in the Legend of Astarte. In that story from the end of the Eighteenth 
Dynasty we find the sentence ‘If thou art asleep, 

I will wake [thee]’, Ast. 2, x + 6 = L.-Eg. Stories, 78, 6, following an example in 
the previous line of which only ir zv?i is left. The construction is practically the same 
as III (b) in Cerny’s article, the main difference being that the particle used for ‘if’ is not 
in, but the more usual Middle Egyptian ir. The literal meaning is, no doubt, ‘if it (so) 
be (that) thou art in sleep’, the semantic function of the strictly superfluous ztm being to 
stress the contingency already conveyed by the conditional particle. 

In conclusion, Gunn has quoted to me a hieroglyphic example of [ds ‘we’ in Legrain, 
Statues de rois et de particuliers, lii, no. 42206, b. 

Alan H. Gardiner 

^ This is merely a rhetorical question instead of a negative sentence (= Sve have not come’) found in all 
Late Egyptian passages, 

^ Cf. tpnn > and sgnn > co^ii. 

2 [Also in the sentence supposed to end with the first word of no. 17 above.] 



The discoveries made in the tomb of Tut^ankhamun were published in three volumes' 
full of magnificent photographs taken by Mr. Harry Burton of the Metropolitan 
Museum of New York; a succession of fine plates, some in colour, of the shrine, coffins, 
and other more important objects, appeared in the Illustrated London Nezvs on various 
dates. But, inevitably, these publications did not give details of all the objects found, 
some of which of necessity were described only cursorily or set aside altogether for 
future study. This was the case with the textiles: some were described briefly and 
illustrated in volume ill (pis. 39, 40), some in the Illustrated London Nezcs (Aug. 3, 1929, 
pp. 196, 197), and some in the first issue of the journal Embroidery (Dec. 1932). Men- 
tion was made in volume i of other interesting pieces to be studied later. Of the robes 
found in the antechamber, Howard Carter wrote: ‘Many of these are decorated with 
patterns in coloured linen threads. Some are examples of tapestry weaving, similar to 
fragments found in the tomb of Thothmes IV, but there were also undoubted cases of 
applied needle-work. The material from this tomb will be of extreme importance to 
the history of textile art, and it needs very careful study’ (vol. i, p. 172). 

Thus stimulated, expectations were roused, but for some years no further publication 
appeared. The chief reason for this delay seems to have been the difficulty presented 
by the study of textiles so unique in character and in such an extremely delicate condi- 
tion. In the words of Mr. Lucas (vol. ii. Appendix 2) : ‘One of the disappointments of 
the tomb was the very bad state of preservation of practically all the textile fabrics. . . . 
These, most of which had been white originally, varied in colour when found from 
light yellowish brown to very dark brown, almost black, and were generally in very 
poor condition ; the best preserved were fragile and tender, and the worst had become 
a mass of black powder.’ This was probably due to fungoid attack and chemical 
changes induced by warmth and humidity. Further, many of the garments were badly 
crumpled: ‘decorated robes were bundled and thrust into boxes’ (vol. i, p. 135) prob- 
ably because, after a ransacking of the tomb by plunderers, the guardians had cleared 
it up and repacked them, but carelessly and in haste. Some of the textiles, Howard 
Carter considered, had been replaced in the fine coffers and caskets in the antechamber 
where they were found, but others, including the tunic which is the subject of this 
study, were clearly out of place. Still, in respect of this careless packing, the textiles 
had no worse treatment than some of those in the tomb of Tuthmosis IV, which lay 
crumpled up in a mass of rubbish on the floor and were first discovered by an intruding 
pariah puppy! Ancient linen textiles will stand an incredible amount of handling if 
they are in good condition, but, as already said, those in this tom*b had suffered 

^ Howard Carter & A. C. Mace, The Tomb of TiiUankh-amerij vol. i, 1923; vol. ii, 1927; vol. ill, 1933. 



from a state of dampness unusual in Egypt, and further study was clearly a ticklish 

When at length Monsieur R. Pfister undertook, with the permission of Howard 
Carter and the Egyptian Museum authorities, the study of certain of the textiles which 
he published in 1937, he found them in a lamentable state.' It would seem that the 
process of deterioration had continued since their deposit in the Museum, in spite of 
treatment with preservatives,- for it was impossible to detect colours which had been 
noted by Howard Carter, and certain photographs taken during the excavation, when 
compared with later ones, show that there have been changes for the worse in the fabric 
also. In spite of difficulty, Pfister found it possible to study and describe eighteen of 
the more important pieces, most of which are illustrated by him. Among these is the 
tunic of our study. The tunic then as now was in a swing case between two sheets of 
glass so that both back and front could be seen, but the garment is so brittle that the 
Museum authorities, perhaps rightly, refuse to allow it to be opened. In the circum- 
stances it is not remarkable that Pfister, whose time in Cairo was limited, devoted 
himself mostly to textiles that could be examined more closely and gave but a brief 
description of the tunic. 

Though the authors of this paper also have been obliged to depend upon a study of 
the tunic under the glass, they have been more fortunate in other respects. In the first 
place, Mrs. Crowfoot’s original observations were made not long after the discovery; 
the tunic was already encased but the fabric was less dark than it has since become, and 
the glass above it was clean and clear. Secondly, she has been able to study the admir- 
able notes made by Howard Carter when the garment was first found, and the photo- 
graphs taken by Mr. H. Burton before it was under glass. Finally, Mrs. Brunton’s 
drawings, made from the panel itself, reproduced on pis. XVH, XVIII, XX, XXI, and 
XXH, have at last made it possible to study the interesting subjects on the embroidery.^ 

The following sections, 1-3, dealing with the tunic and the technique of the bands 
decorating it, are by Mrs. Crowfoot; the last section, 4, on the designs and their implica- 
tions, is by Mr. N. de G. Davies. 

1 . The Tunic in general 

See pi. XIV 

This tunic (now Cairo, Textile 642; Carter’s number, 367 j) was found in a box 
(No. 367) in the store-room of the tomb; it was obviously not in its original place, for 
the proper contents of the store-room should have been only such things as oils, fats, 

^ R. Pfister, Les textiles dii tomheau de Toutankhamoriy in Revue des Arts Asiatiques, tome xi, fasc. 4, 1937. 
See especially p. 207, and with regard to the condition of the tunic, p. 202 : ‘Cette tunique est en tres mauvais 
etat de conserv^ation, elle est toute noire et les couleurs qui existaient sans doute ont dispani. . . . La bordure du 
bas est decoree d’animaux et de motifs vegetaux mais elle est actuellement completement noire et pratiquement 

^ These were mostly duroprene dissolved in xylol and celluloid dissolved in amyl acetate. 

^ Mrs. Brunton undertook the task in March 1940, completed the drawings in October 1940, and sent them 
to England, where they arrived in January 1941. Her success was achieved in spite of great difficulties. The 
work, she tells us, was ver>’ slow and laborious, and it was next to impossible to see the details here and there 
because the glass was dimmed in places by a grey deposit due probably to the preservative with which the 
garment had been treated. 


unguents, and foodstuffs. A second tunic in elaborate tapestry-weave (367 i), rolls of 
fine linen, and a variety of other objects, lay in the same box. This was of wood deco- 
rated with yellow faience work and red paint and was verv roughly made ; the textiles 
had been crumpled up and thrust into it carelessly. In spite of this rough treatment the 
garments were more complete than those found in the antechamber, our tunic being 
the better preserved of the two, possibly because it lay underneath. 

The tunic is a sleeved robe of fine plain linen decorated with applied bands, both in 
pattern-weave and embroidery, and fringed along the lower edge. It was probably 


Fig. I. Key to the position of the Bands. ^ 

made in one length of cloth folded in two ; the selvedges were sewn together along the 
sides, and openings were left into which the sleeves were sewn ; a hole and vertical slit 
for the neck were cut in the front below the fold ; it seems strange that this neck opening 
should be placed so low, but a model made to measure fitted well. The garment 
measures 113-5 ■' 95 ‘° without the fringe. The sleeves, which are now separated 
from the tunic, are made of finer linen; they are about 36 cm. long and would extend 
from elbow to wrist of the wearer, the body of the tunic being sufficientlv wide to cover 
the upper arm. Other garments found in the tomb differ from this tunic chiefly in the 
absence of sleeves ; in other respects the shape was the same as that shown in fig. i in 
all cases where it could be recovered ; openings were left for the arms above, and some- 
times a few inches were also left unsewn at the bottom to give greater freedom in 
walking. The dimensions of these garments, where ascertainable, varied a good deal; 

^ The arrows on Bands 5 indicate the direction of the warp. 



some are ample, some narrow, some, like our tunic, probably came down only to just 
below the knee, others right down to the feetd A belt, placed low down, would almost 
need to be worn with a garment of this type, and many girdles, or long shawls that 
could have fulfilled the same purpose, were found in the tomb. 

The position of the decorative bands, both woven and embroidered, is indicated in 
fig. I . The stitching by which they were sewn to each other and to the garment can be 
seen clearly in places on the original; it is not easy to distinguish the stitches on the 
photograph, pi. XIV, but they are shown well in several places on the drawings, 
pis. XVII-XXII. In decoration the tunic again has a unique feature, a chest piece in the 
form of a cross, which taken together with the collar may, as Pfister suggests, represent 
the rankh, and, though other embroideries came from the tomb, none had subjects of 
such variety and interest. But all the garments, complete or fragmentary, were decorated 
in an astonishing variety of ways, sometimes with bead w'ork and sequins of gold and 
faience, but more usually with woven patterned bands, sewn on or inwoven, and in some 
cases with embroidery. The favourite position for the bands was down the sides, back 
and front, and round the bottom of the skirt, and a fringe at the bottom was formed 
from the warp ends. Applied collars were frequent, the nearest to that on the tunic 
being Carter 21 aa and o. 

It is not possible to be certain of the complete colour scheme of any garment, but 
Carter’s notes give valuable help in a few cases. The prevailing tone of the decoration 
on the tunic is still, and probably always was blue, but there were originally touches of 
red, green, and black in several places. In the companion garment in tapestry-weave 
(367 i) the colours were blue, red, and white, with blue predominating. A very different 
effect must have been given by 50 a, a robe in yellow linen with narrow stripes in green 
and dark brown and bands with flying ducks in green, and by the plainer 50 j, with 
stripes in brown and green bands. Another robe had bands alternately in black and red.^ 

Decorated garments must have been in use at an earlier date, for among fragments 
of robes decorated in tapestry-weaves of several colours, red, blue, green, yellow, 
brown, and black, found in the tomb of Tuthmosis IV, one bears the ka-namt of 
Tuthmosis III, another the nomen of Amenophis II. 

If we turn and look forward, it is interesting to see how like these garments are to the 
tunics of the Coptic period with their decorative bands of purple or other colours. The 
latter are similar in shape, and made in much the same way, but they always have 
sleeves, often woven in the piece, and the neck-opening is a horizontal slit made along 
the fold. The sleeves are already woven in this way on the earliest tunic known of this 

* The following are the measurements of the most complete among the garments : tunic 367 i, 125 X 82 cm. ; 
SO a, 137 > 83 cm.; 50 j, 138 X 103 cm. j and the child’s dress 21, 80 X 50 cm. 

~ The red of some of the pieces in the tomb has been examined by Pfister and found to be madder. The 
blue, which was not examined, is, as he says, undoubtedly indigo, but I do not agree with him that the plant 
used was woad, hath tinctoria L. I suggest that a more probable source was Indigofera argentea L (~ tinctoria 
Forsk.) which is cultivated and sub-spontaneous in Lower Egypt and indigenous in Upper Eg>"ptand the Sudan, 
unless indeed Indigofera tinctoria L., so widely exported later, had already been brought from India. Till now 
it has not been possible to distinguish the indigo of different plants, but Hj. Ljungh {Birka, ill, 182) speaks as 
if he could detect some difference between the indigo of woad and the true indigo {Indigofera tinctoria) ; it is 
to be hoped he will publish more on this subject. 



class, one believed to be of the second century a.d. from Palmyra. This tunic has a 
medallion and bands woven in wool dyed in the true Tyrian purple; hence Pfister 
suggests in his work on the textiles of Palmyra that the fashion of using purple bands 
as decoration began in Syria and passed to Egypt, where it continued for several centuries. 

Howard Carter delighted in calling this tunic a dalmatic. Pfister, alluding to this, 
says in his conclusion: ‘L’analogie de ces tuniques somptueuses avec la dalmatique 
byzantine est frappante; ces vetements sont done les precurseurs de ceux qui, encore 
aujourd’hui, sont utilises dans le culte chretien.’' 

2. The woven Bands 

For position see fig. i, Nos. 1-5, 8-13 

Like the tunic itself, the bands can be presumed to be of linen. 

In all previous publications these woven bands are referred to as being in tapestry- 
weave.2 This is not remarkable since many fine pieces in this weave were found in the 
tomb and at first sight these bands give the impression of tapestry-weave, that is, a 
weave in which the weft gives the pattern and the warp is concealed. Closer examina- 
tion of the bands has shown that in fact some of them are certainly, and the others most 
probably, in a warp-face weave, in which the close-pressed warps give the pattern and 
the weft is concealed, as in Textile 1045 shown in pis. XVI, XIX. 

It is, of course, impossible to examine the backs of the bands in general, but at 
certain places on the tunic they are torn and turned over, revealing floating threads on 
the back. This occurs at the top of Band 2 on the left side of the tunic and at the 
bottom of Band 3 slightly to the left of the centre; the instances can be located and 
recognized in pi. XIV by means of the key, fig. i . The fragment marked in the key as 
No. 10 is especially important because it hangs free from the garment, and therefore 
both sides are visible through the glass of the case, one side giving part of a design, the 
other floating threads. On the back of the tunic places can also be seen where the bands 
have been tom away from the garment and floating threads appear. No photograph is 
available, but the floats can be seen in the drawings, especially in pi. XVH. 

These observations, the results of two visits to Cairo, show that the backs of the 
bands, where visible, are entirely covered with floating threads ; this alone is proof that 
they are not in tapestry-weave, in which the back and front should show the same kind 
of pattern. At the same time, as the bands are all sewn to the garment and the back and 
front cannot be seen of any piece except in the case of tiny fragments like No. 10, it 
would have been difficult to carry the study further if it had not been for the discovery' 
of the textile shown in pi. XIX. As first recognized by j\Ir. Lucas, who pointed it out to 
me, this bears a strong resemblance to the patterned bands on the tunic, and the con- 
clusions arrived at with regard to them are based on the study of the more accessible 

^ Pfister, op. cit. 218. 

2 Carter speaks of ‘A linen dalmatic decorated with tapestr>"-vvoven and needlework ornament’ (vol. iii, 
pl- 39); ‘a long loose vestment having richly ornamented tapestry-woven borders down both sides’ (/.L.Av, 
Aug. 3, 1929, p. 194); ‘it is ornamented with strips of tapestry^-woven polychrome geometric pattern sewn to 
the basic linen’ {Embroidery, Dec. 1932, fig. i and p. 10); so also ‘Tunique d’apparat, a) encolure et devant 
brode, b) bordure laterale en gobelin’ (Pfister, op. cit., pi. 52, a, b; cf. p. 212). 



textile (see pp. 122-5). A weaving draft made for the best preserv^ed of the bands (No. i) 
is shown in pi. XVI, i. In spite of the difficulties of examination I believe the draft 
is substantially correct and can be used by a weaver with confidence. 

Band No. i. See pi. XV, 5. 6; pi. XVI, i. 3. 

Positioji. Bands with this design form a side border to the tunic, back and front. 
There appear to be some slight differences between the bands on the right and left of 
the tunic in front; it is possible that they are two different bands, not pieces cut from 
the same one. The size in both cases is the same, width about 9-5 cm. The band shown 
in pi. XV, 6 and pi. XVI, i. 3 is from the right-hand side of the tunic, that in 
pi. XV, 5 is from the left side. 

Weave. Warp-face, weft concealed. 

The back of this band has not been seen and the weave is based on its resemblance 
to Textile 1045 (pi. XIX), Bands Nos. 2 and 3, and the fragment No. 10. The character 
of the weave is supported by the presence of what appear to be the selvedges right and 
left of the band ; the selvedge on the right of the right-hand band in front low down is 
clearly to be seen, sewn to the selvedge of the similar band on the back of the tunic. 
This sewing together of the two bands is well shown in the drawing in pi. XXL It can 
be taken then that, looking at the band in pi. XIV or pi. XV, 6, the warp is vertical, 
the weft horizontal. 

The count for the draft pi. XVI, i was made from the photographs and not from the 
textile itself; the actual number of warps given (558) is probably too low, as the finely 
packed threads are difficult to estimate, but the proportions cannot be far from the 

Design. The pattern of squares and zigzags or chevrons is reminiscent of some ceiling 
patterns ; the zigzags also appear on the girdle of Ramesses III in the Liverpool Museum. 
The design repeats on eighteen weft-throws. It could not be woven on less than ten 
heddles. It could also be woven by means of Beduin pattern- weave by the procedure 
described in dealing with Textile 1045, p. 124. I have woven a sample of about the same 
degree of fineness in the Beduin weave and did not meet with any difficulty except that 
in parts of the pattern the colour design makes it necessary to set up three warps instead 
of the usual two. In the three-thread portion the floats are particularly heavy. It is 
interesting to find that in his notes Carter describes this band as a border of ‘thick heavy 
material’ ; this would agree very well with the character of this class of weave. 

Right and left of the bands next to the selvedge there is a simple pattern of checks. 
Checks are the only patterns that can be carried out in Beduin warp-face without float- 
ing threads. If the back of this part of the band were to be examined it ought to show 
the same design as the front, unless indeed several colours were used, and on this point 
there is no evidence. 

Colour. The only colours that I could see on this band are pale blue, dark blue, and 
brown. The brown varies much in shade and is in parts so light that I took it to have 
been originally the natural linen thread. In my draft, pi. XVI, i, I used therefore only 
three colours, pale blue, dark blue, and natural. Later I came to the conclusion that 



some parts now brown must have been originally of some shade darker than natural. 
In the drawing of the pattern, pi. XVI, 3, these parts are shown as brown. Later still, on 
studying Carter’s notes I found that other colours besides blue had been visible in a 
few places on the band when first discovered, that is, red, green, and black. The tracts 
marked brown in pi. XVI, 3 were red, some of the squares marked as blue in the little 
border right and left of the centre were green, and the dark filling near the check 
pattern was black. The original colouring would therefore be: zcarp, blue (pale and 
dark), red, green, black, and natural; weft, natural. 

Band No. 2. See pi. XV, 3. 

Position. This band is seen above the embroidered panels (No. 6) on the back and 
front of the tunic. 

Weave. It is very much torn in front and is folded over on the left side at the top, 
showing floating threads on the reverse. It is therefore certainly in warp-weave; as 
seen in the plate the warp is vertical. 

Design. Diamonds and chevrons. 

Colour. The ground in the centre and the darker rows of diamonds are brown ; the 
lighter alternate rows are blue outlined with white ; the chevrons down the middle are 
white with a blue centre. 

Band No. 3. See pi. XV, 4. 

Position. This band is seen below the embroidered panels (No. 6) on the back and 
front of the tunic. 

Weave. It is certainly in warp-face weave ; as seen in pi. XV, 4 the warp is vertical. 
The portion on the front, torn and turned over at the bottom to the left of the centre, 
clearly shows the floating threads of the reverse side. On the front of this band part of 
the pattern has blocks of three coloured squares with bands of white or a pale colour 
intersecting them and the long floats of the white threads carrying over the squares are 
most conspicuous on the reverse side ; this is a most characteristic feature of this class 
of weave. 

Design. Zigzags and squares. 

Colour. The colour scheme is gay; the centre zigzag and the outer edges, now 
brownish, were probably natural or white, as also the bands intersecting the blocks of 
blue and red brown squares ; the zigzag on the left of centre is blue, the two on the right 
are red and blue, and the filling is red-brown. 

Band No. 4. Visible in pi. XIV and pi. XVII, right side. 

Position. Pieces of bands in this design are seen on the front of the tunic on the 
right-hand side of Band 3 and the embroidered panel, and to judge from Carter’s notes 
there must have been similar pieces on the left side of the tunic also, now in a very 
ragged condition. Two similar bands are present on the back of the tunic on the left 
side, one is the side border, the other is next to the embroidered panel; another prob^ 
ably once existed on the right side, now in poor condition. 

Weave. Floating threads can be seen on a piece turned over on the back as shown in 
the drawing, pi. XVH, so the band is probably in the same weave as the others. 


Design. The design is one of squares, bands, and zigzags with rhombs down the 

Colour. Blue, grey, and brown were the only colours recognizable here and there. 
Band No. 5. See pi. XV, i. 2. 

Position. The complete design of this band is only to be seen on the back of the 
tunic, left of the embroidered panel (pi. XVII) ; the warp is here taken to be vertical. This 
is the broadest of all the bands, 14 cm. wide. Pieces obviously cut from this band are 
seen right and left on the front of the tunic above Band 2, the direction of the warp is 
here horizontal; the raw edges of the band are apparently turned in and sewn down 
right and left, while one selvedge can be clearly seen sewn over the lower end of Band i 
and the other, not so clearly, sewn to a piece of another band below, see pi. XV, 6. There 
is a somewhat similar arrangement of pieces from this band on the back also, see pi. XVII . 

Weave. The evidence from torn places is slight, but it is probably in the same weave 
as the others. 

Design. Diamonds and squares in a rectangular network. 

Colour. The diamonds are in alternate rows of blue and grey, outlined in pale 
brown; the network of lines is blackish, enclosing squares in brown and natural; the 
border, pi. XV, i , is in brown, blue, and grey. 

Band No. 8. See pis. XIV, XVIII. 

Position. The collar is an applied woven band about 5 cm. broad sewn on to the 
tunic; two embroidered bands edged with braids on one side form borders to the 
opening. According to Carter’s notes the collar was tied with two strings, and one of 
these can still be distinguished in pi. XIV. 

Weave. Unfortunately I had no time when in Cairo to study the collar; the texture 
is difficult to make out from the photograph, but it is probably in warp-weave. There 
is a strong resemblance between it and two other collars of simpler pattern shown in 
photographs among Carter’s notes. These come from shirts of the size for a child 
found in casket 21 in the antechamber. The weave here is seen to be of the nature of a 
braid, several wefts being put through together to form loops at each selvedge. Through 
these loops on one side the string is threaded to draw the collar in. This appears to be 
the case also on the collar of the tunic, but the edges are in bad condition and difficult 
to distinguish with certainty. 

Design. There is a row of cartouches down the centre side by side, reading Neb- 
khepruref. On one side of it are two rows of squares, very like those to right and left 
of the centre on Band i ; on the other possibly there is a check pattern. This design 
appears to repeat on thirteen weft-throws, and could probably be woven on eight 
heddles or by Beduin pattern-weave, but I have not been able to make a draft for it. 

Colour. Blue, brown, and white or natural are still visible in parts. 

Band No. 9. See pi. XVIII. 

Position. The embroidered panels on the chest below the collar are bordered on all 
sides with a narrow band in a check pattern. 

Plate XVIII 

Scale 3 : 7 

Front. Decoration of the Neck Opening. 




Weave. Unless many colours are used, and of this there is no evidence, such a 
pattern can be woven in plain warp-weave. 

Design. Checks. This band, like Nos. 1 1 and 12, is very like the little band in checks 
that binds the broad end of the girdle of Ramesses III at Liverpool. 

Colour. No evidence. 

Band No. 10. See pi. XIV. 

Position. This band is a fragment hanging from the lower edge of the tunic on the 
right-hand side; it is probably the only remaining fragment of the original lower 
border, for part of a fringe still hangs from it and must, from Carter’s notes, have been 
more voluminous when first discovered. 

Weave. When I examined the band in Cairo I could see floating threads at the back 
of it, and it is probably in some kind of warp-weave. The band may have been made 
on the warp ends as suggested for Band 13, or woven as a separate piece and sewn on. 

Design. The design of this fragment cannot be made out. A zigzag runs across it. 

Colour. No evidence. 

Bands Nos. ii and 12. See pi. XIV. 

Position. The sleeves were decorated with three narrow bands in check patterns. 

Weave. These bands could be carried out in plain warp-weave. 

Design. It is not possible to be certain of the designs but it is a check pattern in both 

Colour. Blue occurs on them according to Carter’s notes. 

Band No. 13. 

Position. This band, in a check pattern with fringe hanging from it, is seen at the 
back of the tunic, bottom left, in pis. XVII and XXII. 

Weave. Unfortunately I made no study of this band from the original and no photo- 
graph is available. Fringes on this kind of garment are usually made from the warp 
ends. If this is the case here, the check border may have been made on them, in the 
same way as such borders are made at the present day in Cairo and Omdurman. A 
warp is laid on the little ‘fringe loom’ to form the border, and the warp ends of the 
garment are put through as wefts, hanging down to form the fringe below it. This may 
have been done on some simple loom or frame for the border and fringe on the tunic, 
or border and fringe may have been made separately and sewn on ; there is no evidence 
to prove which method was used. 

Design. Checks. 

Colour. No evidence. 

Comparative Material. 

As already noted, one textile (Textile 1045) from Tut'ankhamun’s tomb bears a 
strong resemblance to the pattern border. The examination of this textile was of con- 
siderable assistance in the study of the weave of the pattern-bands, and it is therefore 
described in detail below (see pp. 1 22-4). So far no other te.xtile from the tomb has been 
noted in this warp-weave to compare with them. All the other patterned pieces that 




1 have seen are in tapestry-weave of marvellously fine quality, such as the second tunic 
(367 i)' and the famous gloves and girdles. ^ These compare well with the beautiful 
fragments of robes decorated in tapestry-weave from the tomb of Tuthmosis IV, as is 
recorded by Carter in his notes. ^ 

Altogether I only know of three textiles from Ancient Egypt in warp-weave to com- 
pare with those from our tomb. These are the girdle of Ramesses IIT (Liverpool 
Museum), the Hood textile, = and Textile 251-1921^ (Victoria and Albert Museum), 
and none of these gives an exact parallel for the weave of the tunic bands. 

The girdle of Ramesses III is in warp-face double-weave; the colours are blue, red, 
green, and natural. There are points of resemblance to the tunic bands in the appear- 
ance of the weave and in the zigzags which form part of the pattern. The resemblance 
between the braid which binds it and that which binds the breastplate of the tunic has 
already been noted. 

The Hood textile (Victoria and Albert Museum, T21-1940), from Thebes, 
uncertain in date, of fine linen in blue and natural, is in warp-face weave, but the pat- 
tern, apart from simple checks, is achieved by a fantastic substitution of wefts for warps. 

Textile 251 -1921 (Victoria and Albert Museum), found by Carter in an Eighteenth 
Dynasty tomb, is in coarse linen, 3 ft. 2 in. x i ft. 5J in. It has a simple geometric 
pattern in blue, brown, red, and natural, repeating on four throws of weft ; to judge 
from the class of faults it shows, it was probably woven on three heddles or two heddles 
and a shed rod. 

The bands in warp-weave from the tomb of Tut^ankhamun are therefore up to the 
present unique both in designs and weave. 

Textile 1045 (Cairo). Carter, No. 54 p. See pi. XVI, 2. 4 and pi. XIX. This 
textile, which has a strong resemblance to the bands on the tunic, came from a casket 
(No. 54) of ebony and painted wood, found in the antechamber ; it has floating threads at 
the back and is certainly in warp-face weave. It was this which gave me the key to the 
weave of the bands, a weave which has not previously been described from Ancient 
Egypt. The design also is interesting : the rows of chevrons with dividing lines between 
them occur also on many other objects from the tomb ; they seem to have been a popular 
form of decoration at this period and one not seen much before it. 

The description of the textile given here is based on an examination made in Cairo 
Museum by kind permission of the authorities, and on subsequent study of photographs 
and the making of samples. 

Material. Linen; the thread is S-spun, as is usual in Ancient Egs^ptian weaves. 

Description. This textile is 39 cm. long, 8-5 cm. wide in the centre, and 5-5 cm. wide 
at the ends ; it has a binding in fine plain linen on all four sides ; presumably it had been 
sewn on to a garment. It is described in Howard Carter’s notes as : ‘a tapestry-woven 

^ Carter, /.L.iV., Aug. 3, 1929, p. 196; Embroidery ^ Dec. 1932, fig. 2 and p. 10. 

2 Pfister, op. cit.^ pis. 51 a, b, d; 52 c; 53 b. 

3 Carter & Newberry, The Tomb of Thoutmosis /F, 1904, pis. i, 28. 

^ C. H. Johl, Altdgyptische Webestiihle, 61; T. O. Lee, Liverpool Annals of Art and Archaeology , vol. v; 
G. M, Crowfoot, op. cit., vol. x. 

5 Crowfoot, Ancient Egypt, 1933, frontispiece and p. 43. ^ poster, op. cit., fig. 5. 



strip backed with ordinary cloth’. This backing, fortunately for the student, is now 
much perished, and where it has disappeared it is now plain that the textile is not in 
tapestry-weave, for if this were the case the back would have shown the same pattern as the 
front, whereas it is a mass of floating threads. This part of the back of the textile is 
shown in the enlargement in pi. XIX, 3, where the floating threads are seen clearly except 
where the weave is confused by fragments of textiles adhering to it. The adherent piece 
at the top of the photograph is probably a fragment of the textile itself; that at the 
bottom may be a folded fragment of the original backing bordered by a narrow braid. 
This braid is similar to two others from the tomb; of these one is described fully by 
Pfister [op. cit., fig. 4) and the other is seen on the embroidered panel from the robe 
loi p [op. cit., pi. 53 a). 

On the face of the cloth the pattern shows well in the original in spite of a heavy 
brown stain. The colours now visible on the chevrons are a repeat of pale brown, pale 
blue, dark brown, and pale blue with dividing lines in pale brown, as shown in pi . XVI, 4. 
Pfister also noted these colours: ‘bleu clair, beige, brun noir’.' I am inclined to think 
that some colour changes must have taken place, for in Howard Carter’s notes, besides 
blue, mention is made only of yellow and green (?). The traditional colours in this type 
of design on the wall-paintings are usually red, blue, and green, with dividing lines in 
yellow. It may be that the pale brown was originally yellow, while the dark brown, 
which has run badly, staining parts of the textile, may originally have been red, possibly 
dyed with madder, which from Pfister’s discoveries is now proved to be the ‘Pharaonic 
red’. He found the pieces in madder red examined from the tomb to be but poorly 
dyed, and liable to run when wetted. This is not surprising, for modern weavers 
experimenting with vegetable dyes find it extremely difficult to dye linen with madder 

Weave. As already said, the piece is in warp-weave. Before coming to this conclusion 
I had to consider the possibility that it might be in a weft-face weave other than true 
tapestr\'-weave, in which floating threads could occur at the back. There is a weft-face 
weave of this kind used to-day in Morocco for patterned bands on women’s dress.- 
This is put in entirely by hand while the cloth is on the loom ; some threads are carried 
through and float at the back where not needed for the pattern, but in certain motifs the 
threads are returned, or cut off to avoid a long float, and rows of tapestry or twined 
weave are often combined with it ; it is, in fact, a mixed technique. On the other hand, 
the character of the weave in Textile 1045 is consistent throughout, for all the pattern 
threads appear to go from top to bottom of the piece. Afore important still is the fact 
that in one place at the side the binding is frayed and the textile revealed has the closely 
packed threads peculiar to a selvedge. The position of a selvedge here, taken with the 
texture, gives proof that the textile is in a warp-weave. 

The warp threads are vertical as shown in pi. XIX, i, that is, on the long axis of the 

^ Op. cit., pis. 51 f. and p. 214. An illustration is cn en and a short description of the textile, but no dis- 
cussion of the weave. 

- Aliss de Riviere kindly showed me examples of this wea\'e in the Trocadero Musee de THomnie, Paris: 
museum nos. 29, 37, 81 ; provenance stated as ‘Maroc, Moyen Atlas’. 



piece; those not required in the pattern float at the back. The weft, in natural linen, is 
concealed except where the fabric is torn. 

The draft of the pattern is given in pi. XVI, 2. Like all warp-face drafts it distorts and 
elongates a pattern which really depends on closely packed threads, and the design in 
more accurate proportions is shown in pi. XVI, 4. The draft has a count of 780 warps, but 
only shows the warps visible from binding to binding. With the addition of the portions 
under the bindings the total count would be not less than about 880, but these figures 
must be taken with caution. I think the proportions of the draft are good, and if used 
for weaving will give the right effect, though the actual warp numbers may be slightly 
higher than my estimate. The narrowing of the piece at either end may have been 
achieved by a folding of the edge under the binding, as a little of the pattern is lost on 
either side. 

The design repeats on twelve w'eft-throws, and could not be woven on less than seven 
heddles. It could be woven by a more simple procedure like that of Beduin pattern-weave, 
and I think that the latter is more probable for the following reasons. At this period the 
Ancient Egyptians already had two looms, the ground loom and the vertical loom. The 
latter is the perfect loom for tapestry-weave and it is an interesting fact that it appears 
on the monuments first in the Eighteenth Dynasty, when also the earliest fine tapestry- 
weaves appear. But neither the ground loom nor the vertical loom are ideal looms on 
which to multiply heddles, and as already noted, seven are required for the textile now 
under discussion, and ten for Band i of the tunic. I therefore suggest Beduin pattern- 
weave as a possible alternative. It is used for decorative bands on tents in the Western 
Desert (Egypt), Palestine, Transjordan, and Syria. The women weave on the ground 
loom' equipped only with a rod heddle and a shed rod. The procedure is to set up a 
double warp for the patterned portion, two threads, say black and white, in each leash 
of the rod heddle and two threads, black and white, on the shed rod. The weaver 
chooses which of the two colours she needs for her pattern and the other floats at the 
back. The resulting texture is closely packed, the pattern is in the warp, and the weft 
is entirely concealed. None of these Beduin weaves, in wool of course, are as fine as the 
linen weave of Textile 1045, but the procedure is extremely simple and would present 
no difficulty on either of the looms to someone with the right kind of eyesight. In this 
particular pattern three threads of different colours have occasionally to be set up in one 
leash of the heddle instead of two. I have woven a small sample myself and found it 
possible to manage this and obtain a result that seems to resemble the original. 

Design. Rows of chevrons in different colours, now pale brown, dark brown, and 
blue, run across the textile. The chevrons end in rhombs at the edges of the material, 
and are separated from each other by narrow bands in pale brown. The central part of 
this design, the rows of chevrons, is similar to the type of chevron pattern classed by 
Van Gennep and Jequier as Theme C.I. in their discussion of the chevron patterns on 
girdles worn by Pharaoh.^ A magnificent example is seen on the kilt and also on the 

^ The same procedure could be easily carried out on the vertical loom. 

2 Le Tissage aux cartons, etc., 1916, fig, 10. ‘Les zones decores de chevrons (Theme C). Quand les zones 
sont aux nombre de plus de trois, le decor le plus frequent est forme par une serie de petits chevrons de couleurs, 
tous egaux et la pointe dirigee en arriere, separes par des lignes, egalement en chevrons, de moitie plus etroites, 



shoulder covering of Ramesses III as portrayed in the Tomb of Amenkhopshef at 
Thebes.' On the kilt blue and green chevrons are separated by yellow lines. The same 
type of pattern is found in the decoration of other objects in the tomb of Tut'ankhamun, 
for example, on the second state chariot which was ‘encrusted with semi-precious 
stones and polychrome glass’ (Carter, op. cit., ii, pis. 17, B; 38), on the second coffin, 
‘of oakw^ood overlaid with sheet gold on gesso, inlaid wdth opaque polychrome glass, 
simulating red jasper, lapis lazuli, and turquoise’ (pis. 23. 68), on the third (innermost) 
coffin of gold ‘in rich cloisonne work’ (pis. 24, 71), on the throne and footstool (ill, 
pi. 33), and on the miniature gold coffin (pi. 54). Howard Carter refers to this chevron 
design as ‘feathered’,- possiblv because it is seen on the tails of the vultures on the gold 
coffin (pi. 71), on the King’s ear-rings (iii, pi. 18), and on the tail of the hawk and the 
tail and lower wing of the vulture on the Pectoral (ll, pi. 80). In these examples the 
rounded tip of each ‘feather’ is indicated; in our textile the rhombs in which the rows 
of chevrons end might be a conventionalized form of these ‘feather-tips’. It is not 
surprising that a design so popular that it was carried out in the most costly materials 
should appear also on one of the fine textiles of the King’s apparel. 

It does not seem to have been popular much before this period ; I do not know of any 
instance earlier than those already cited of the Eighteenth Dynasty. But there is one 
very curious instance of survival. This chevron design is seen on the skirt and back of 
the royal sphinx on the painted casket from the tomb (i, pi. 54), and precisely the same 
design is to be found as a skirt decoration on royal sphinxes on the ivories of Arslan 
Tash^ in Syria, and on those of Samaria in Palestine, both circa ninth century B.c.^ 

3. The embroidered Border and Bands 

For position see fig. i, Nos. 6, 7 

The embroidered decoration includes the panels forming the broad border on the 
back and front of the tunic, and the bands forming the cross on the chest, all no doubt 
worked separately and sewn to the garment. According to Carter they are all worked 
upon ‘a fine diaphanous cellular fabric’ {Embroidery, Dec. 1932, p. 10). Mrs. Brunton 
distinguished a small portion of a plain textile visible on the front as ‘the edge of the 
strip of fine muslin which was embroidered before being stitched to the garment’. 

c^est-a-dire ayant exactement la largeur des lignes longitudinales. Les chevrons successifs sont altemativement 
bleus, verts et rouges, et la ligne de bordure toujours jaune, de meme que les petits chevrons de separation.’ 
See Guilmant, Le Tombeau de Ramses IX, pi. 76; Leps., Dkm., iir, pis. i, 217; Champollion, Mon., pis. 237, 
260, 268, 271. See Lepsius, op, cit,, also iii, pi. i (New Kingdom); two centre rows on the kilt have this type 
of chevron, and also the flail; the order of colour is blue, green, blue, red, with yellow between. Op, cit., iii, 
190, pi. 19 (Abu Simbel: in colour) kilt with chevrons; approximately this design; blue and red on gold. 
Op. cit., Ill, 1 15, Dyn. XVIII (Thebes) belt and kilt of Pharaoh: five rows of chevrons; red, green, blue, with 
yellow between. Op. cit., iii, 118, belt and kilt of Pharaoh: three rows of chevrons in red, green, blue, and 
yellow betw’een each and yellow lines. 

* Nina M. Davies, Ancient Egyptian Pamtings, pi. 103. 

“ Of the second coffin he says : ‘It has the Nemes headdress and its ornamentation is of the feathered typc\ 
and of the miniature gold coffins, comparing their design with that of the second coffin, he says ‘They are far 
more elaborately inlaid in feather design’. 

^ F. Thureau-Dangin and others, Arslan Task (in Biblioth. archeol. et hist., xvi, 1931), pis. 28, 23. 25; 30, 
29* 30; 3i» 31- 33' 

^ Early Ivories, J. W. & G, M. Crowfoot, Samaria- Sebaste, ii, pis. 5, 3; 7, 12. 14. 



These expressions would indicate that the linen ground was in an open weave, in which 
the threads, though fine, could be clearly distinguished, a texture very suitable for 

Colour. Colour is not mentioned in Carter’s notes. Blue can be seen in parts of the 
bands, but Mrs. Brunton writes that no colours are now visible on the borders, merely 
shades of brown from biscuit to nearly black. However, in one place she notes : ‘The 
background is faintly green. The plants have a trace of white thread outline.’ Pfister* 
also noted a white outline in some places. This is extremely interesting because in 
Carter’s description of another embroidered panel found with the linen robe No. loi p 
he mentions patterns of green thread outlined by white thread in a running stitch. 

Stitches. Airs. Brunton recognized two stitches with certainty, outline stitch and 
chain stitch, the latter only in a few places. Pfister also recognized chain stitch on two 
other embroidered pieces from the tomb ; these were the panel mentioned above from 
robe loi p and a piece with four ‘Alaltese’ crosses {op. cit., pis. 53 a; 54 e). 

Another note made by Airs. Brunton stresses the fact that parts of the embroidery 
have perished. She says of her drawings; ‘Where the linen is spotted this represents 
needle-holes. The background was originally filled in as intact patches remain here 
and there.’ 

Subjects. The subjects on the embroidery are arranged in small panels or squares, 
and these appear to be designed so that the panels alternately have the subjects light 
on a dark background and dark on a light background. The subjects are fully discussed 
in Section II by Air. N. de G. Davies, who has also provided key drawings to them in 
plates XX and XXII. 

Comparative Material. There are several other instances of embroidery from the 
tomb besides those already mentioned, but none with subjects similar to those on the 
tunic. The only two other examples of embroidery of this period known to me both 
come from the tomb of Tuthmosis IV.- One, No. 46526, is the fragment of a robe with 
the name of Amenophis II, the other, No. 46529, is part of a robe thought by Carter 
to be possibly of the time of Tuthmosis IV. The first is of a very simple character, with 
rows of fine black stitches marking off the tapestry' designs. The second is rather more 
elaborate, having rows of rosettes with pale green centres and pale pink petals em- 
broidered on a white linen striped in pink. 

4. The Subjects on the embroidered Panels 


Alost of the embroidered panels were worked separately as small squares and sewn 
together before being applied to the garment, and are marked out by being alternately 
in a different stitch (?) and possibly in a different colour. ^ At times several panels are 

^ Op, cit., p. 212. ‘Le tissu qui supporte la broderie est ajoure par endroits; certains contours de la broderie 
sont executes en fils tres blancs dont il n’etait malheureusement pas possible d'etablir la nature.’ 

’ Carter & Newberry, op. cit., pi. 28. 

5 A. 10 is half m one stitch, half in another (A standing for the front, B for the back). The embroidered 
borders of zigzags aboAe and beloAV the panels also show this variation, but with great irregularity. These 
borders are made separately out of snippets, generally two or three panels long. 

Plate XX 

Scale 2 : 5 

Front. Key to the Panels 

Scale I : 2 

Front. Embroidered Panels 1-9 


Plate XXI 

r‘.' i"i.''» ■- ■ r.' “'I'" ' . ’*■‘1 ! • *“ • .■■' ■ '■'' ■ •• 

“ 'r* 

-.. n: ■ ■ , .* ■ 




' \. 


*; vN^ 


■-•■.- . 1- . - V,:; > >'.1 . . ■ s - Ti ■ ■:««■ ■■''''■ li 

■'• ■ '*■■:.:■ -* r ^ . ■. -ft.v,. #:».rv 

• J* « ■ ■• I ■ - . «■ ■ ;,:* ^1' k^l , 

V ■ ' ^ , ." • t i' ■ I. M 

'v‘ .". ' . 11 ".v ';•'•.:!»■»* 3 . -V '. ■ 

;'■'' ■■■• . ;-•* ■■;•■ V? ' islw' - MA. 

-.. . , r . r ,^^ . X ■ ■•■ ■. ■ ■■ ’. I-.' . ■ • '‘-**■3 

■■'*r -v .z.-.A,*-.: -v.-' y ’ ■ ? //-‘Ol 

‘■■O: K'fi 

!!“ * SB .«r: -a a ^ .*; m-*. *■ ^ -. j .ggg 

--, *: tf ^ B sr «!4 KS xa ji s: y;: KJI er* «' ■ i, ■• ■ .■:# ^ 

-5. Si., -.a-, .a .S- a:, a ■. # V -*-- 1 «» 

: fi. tf « i--S S*s.« ■■ JS W -.L 6 N A k t ■“ "I » W “ i*"! ■ i «, ^ ^ 

•»«» *:«>V ^ 

'• . ■ '■ ’.r. ■/ “' ■> ^ M 

»'■ *■ “• -- --_- 

J>:> .. . 

'••■■■ •' . V /fl S*':",' .f' 'tS 

■^“ liTi g*iL |> .v' ':^i. 


< / 

pRONT. The Embroidered Panels lo-ra and Side Borders. 



worked on one pieced The front strip is longer than the back one, a square of woven 
work on the left side of the back taking the place of embroidered subjects, with astonish- 
ing asymmetry. Since the detail can scarcely be trusted now, the panels are chiefly of 
interest as an answer to the question whether they are Egyptian products or Syrian, or, 
it may be, worked in Egypt by Syrian needlewomen. It may be said in advance that 
they prove to be distinctly Syrian in character, though they show marked Egyptian 
influence. Nothing definite can be said as to their merit as works of art, since needle- 
work depends for its effect on masses of colour and on texture rather than on line, and 
all three have to be reconstructed in imagination in this case. But the original aspect 
can scarcely have failed to be very rich and may well have been a marvellous achieve- 
ment of the weaver’s and the embroiderer’s art. 

The inclination towards scenes of hunting was so strong and agelong in Egvpt that 
where this subject is used by Syrians one may suspect some concession to Egyptian 
tastes. Here the details conform in general to Egyptian models, especially to those of 
the Eighteenth Dynasty (foreshadowed earlier at Mer), in which the animals are dis- 
tributed about the field, with or without ground under their feet, instead of being 
ranked in processional files. The mingling of the regular life of the desert fauna with 
their terrified flight before beasts of prey or trained dogs is very characteristic of 
Egyptian pictures. In some points, however, these embroidered designs are in discord 
with it. The cantering legs of the ibex, the frequent appearance of the lion and his 
violent action, the unreal position of the tail between the legs in attack, ^ the interspersed 
flowers without stem or leaf, the alternation of excerpts from the hunt with the palmette 
design, and the absence of any hunter,^ though his dogs, slipped from the leash (as the 
collars show), are so prominent, are all un-Egyptian. In addition, even where only 
animals appear, they carry a latent symbolism of that victory of the divine hero over 
his enemies which is so striking a feature of IMesopotamian art.+ To crown all, the 
garment seems to be Syrian, as is indicated by the bands of decoration on the lower 
hem, on the sleeves, and up the side hems, as well as by the cross-wise gusset below the 
neck-opening, and even more decisively by the long sleeves. ^ To establish this conclu- 
sion let us proceed to examine the symbolic elements of the design and the scenes of chase. 

The Palmette. This was probably introduced into Egypt from Syria and at first 

^ e.g. A. 4, 5, 6, (and 7?) together; so too A. ii, 12; also B. 3, 4, 5, 

^ This is paralleled only in such designs as one may suspect to be Syrian, e.g. IVL 155, 186, 202; St. 273, 
305; I.L.N. 1937, p. 708. (I use AI. for Montet, Reliques de VArt Syrien; St. for Steindorff, Die Kunst der 
Aegypter; \V. for Weber, Altorientalische Siegelbilder \ l.L.X. for Illustrated London News). 

3 The hunter is shown in AI. 171 and I.L.N. 1937, p. 708. 

The relics of Tut^ankhamun show it, as regards the royal hero, in the parallelism of the scenes of hunting 
and war on the casket and the decorations of the p>TC (St. 273). 

5 For three bands on the sleeves, and perhaps false memories of the gusset, see Bull. MNIAy Alarch 1926, 
II, p. 47 and JEA xx, pi. 25. For a cross at the neck, see Wilkinson, Manners and Customs (ed. Birch), i, 
p. 246, 6. Apart from the sleeves and decoration, the gown is not unlike the Egyptian shirt, worn below the 
kilt (Davies, Tomb of Ramose, pi. 7 ; Tomb of Two Sculptors, pi. 29). For shirts extant see Winlock, Private Life 
of Ancient Egyptians, pi. 9, and Alond, Liverpool Annals of Art and Archaeology, xvi, 57 and fig, 8. I estimate 
that the garment would have fallen well below the knee of the king, and the sleeve to the wrist at least, for Derry 
gives his height as 5 ft. 6 ins. Probably the king never wore it, unless he had a Syrian harem like his forefathers. 
Yet it was not left behind to be a prized heirloom, as were the garments in the tomb of Tuthmosis IV. 



chiefly occurs as the decoration of the weapons — daggers, sheaths, bow-cases — ^which 
Egypt imported. In the restricted spaces offered there the design assumed a simple 
and attractive form which was akin to Egyptian ornamentation, being derived apparently 
from floral forms. ^ The later development, florid as well as floral, might also at its time 
be acceptable in Egypt, just because exotic. 

The probable origin of the palmette is in the Assyrian tree of life, so much identified 
with the palm. 2 The essential features of this are the spreading head of foliage, the 
hanging fruit, the outcurving fronds at the root, the long bare trunk. But, as the last 
was adverse to decorative treatment, it is replaced in Syria by floral forms, the leaves 
furnishing volutes curving both up and down, flowers such as the iris (or the Egyptian 
‘lily’) presenting a similar curve by its curling sepals and its mass of stamens, and the 
whole plant the spreading head. Additional height was given to it by repetition of the 
characteristic element which seems to have undergone a previous architectural styliza- 
tion . 3 The Assyrian embellishment of the palm is still more unsatisfactory (W. 470-86). 
The simpler forms of the palmette are seen in St. 303, 305, and it is noteworthy that in 
the latter instance we see the palmette as a plant growing in the desert. So also in 
Borchardt, Allerhand Kleinigkeiten, pi. 13. Interesting variants of the palmette are 
found in M. 146, 172, 186. 

The Sphinx. The Eastern conception of the sphinx, so different from that of Egypt, 
is here transferred to the latter country, and other examples of the same period can be 
cited as witnesses of the surprisingly friendly reception it had there.^ In Egypt the 
human-headed lion is the embodiment of conscious supremacy; in the East the com- 
posite lion ,3 whether as sphinx or as gryphon, from being a monster inimical to the 
gods has become a symbol of submission to higher powers or their ally (W. 307-9, 351, 
480). The sphinx is given a woman’s head,^ and wings proclaim her to be superhuman 
or even a goddess. As such she is perhaps at times to be identified with Astarte or, on 
emigration to Egypt where she is almost exclusively to be discovered, with Hathor. 
For she appears on ointment horns (as a head only),^ jewellery, toilet boxes, etc.® Her 

^ In Davies, The Tomb of Kenamutiy pL 14, floral palmettes surround dww-palms, perhaps as the rim and 
central ornaments of a noble epergne of gold. 

- For a full and lavishly illustrated discussion of the subject consult Danthine, Le Palmier dattier et les 
arbres sacreSy Paris, 1937. 

3 This mode of building up a decorative element perhaps helped to produce the Ramesside column with 
superimposed capitals. A clever synthesis of floral elements is seen in the ‘botanical garden’ at Kamak (Meyer, 
Fremdvolker^ i57~77)- It may be Syrian work. 

^ Female sphinxes in Egypt comprise really Egyptian ones and also Syrianized forms. Egyptian: i, the 
queen of Tuthmosis III, Newberry, Life of Rekhmara, pi. 22; 2, perhaps the same, von Bissing, Denkmdler^ 
pl* 37 i 3 j queen Shepenupet of Dyn. XXVI, Berlin, Verzeichnis, fig. 51 ; 4, small sphinx resembling no. 2, 
Ann, Serv,y xxxi, 128. Syrianized: 5, queen Teye at Sede'inga, Leps., Dkm.y in, 82, with the tail between the 
legs ; 6, on a statue of queen Mutnedjemet at Turin, Champollion, Lettres au Due de Blacas, pl. i ; 7, on a toilet 
box, Abbott collection, Prisse, UArt Egyptien^ ii, pl. 35, 4; 8, on a dish, Petrie, Illahuny Kakun, and Gurob, 
pl. 20 ; 9, on a vase in the pavilion, Medinet Habu, Prisse, op. cit.y pl. 35, 5 ; 10, 1 1, on vases at Kamak, Wreszin- 
ski. Atlas y n, 49, 59; 12, painting, Borchardt, Allerhand Kleinigkeiten y pl. 13. ^ Or cheetah. So Borchardt. 

^ Rarely the teats of a lioness (nos. 5, ii above, and I.L.N.y 1937, p. 709), once the breasts of a woman, 
Borchardt, Portrdtkopf der Teye, fig. 30. 

^ M. 37-9. Cf. N. M. Davies, Ancient Egyptian Paintings , pl- 42, and Petrie, Qumehy pl. 25. 

® M. 148, 149, 200-2. Also in I.L.N.y loc. cit.; G. Loud, Megiddo IvorieSy pl. 7, 21. 22. 



floral head-dress also has Egyptian parallels in those of women of the harem, dancers, 
etc. Its many variants are against a specific identification with any divinity ; the Syrian 
sphinx may be no more than a well-disposed genius, representing to Egypt the sub- 
missive soul of that land.^ The addition of the pursuit of a caprine animal by a dog 
above the sphinx on panels A 7, 9, besides its use as a filler, may carry some allusion to 
the victorious power of the gods which compels erstwhile foes to adoration (W. 480). 
It may even show that the female sphinx of Syria was regarded as a real member of the 
animal world. The painted scene on the side panel (?) of a chariot^ is intensely interesting 
in its close analogy to the panels we are considering. Its position would call for a real hunt- 
ing scene ; yet we have here, besides lions and a dog or hunting cheetah attacking a bull, a 
winged gryphon as the leading beast of prey and a female sphinx calmly posed above a 
conflict, in which there is no other sign of symbolism. The Syrian origin of the scene 
is plain in the position of the tails and the exceptionally broad stride of the animals. 

The Gryphon. The lion with the head of a crested bird, and generally with its wings 
also, perhaps had its ultimate origin in Mesopotamia, a land rich in composite animals ; 
but it, or its like, found a more graceful form in Crete^ and thence passed directly to 
Egypt (as regards the head at least)-^ and later by way of Syria as a complete animal of 
pacific nature. But in Mycenean times and centres it had acquired grim reality as a 
ferocious beast of prey.s Its role in Egypt, where it had a native but disregarded pre- 
decessor,^ is benevolent, though the desert is its home.'^ In Eastern glyptic art, where 
the animals change their natures so bewilderingly, the gryphon may be an enemy,^ or, 
with the lion as a comrade, may take the place of the triumphant hero-god and his 
associate.® The blurred head of the right-hand animal in panel A 6 leaves us in doubt 
whether it be a lion or a gryphon. Probably tw^o gryphons are facing one another in a 
common victory.'® The bull placed overhead there is only a second picture of the 
victim-to-be, a frequent feature in such scenes. 

In conclusion the scenes depicted in these two strips of embroidery may be briefly 

* On the gem of Amenophis III {JEA iii, pi. ii) the sphinx may be taken to represent the homage of the 
king’s Syrian consort, and that on the group of Haremhab and Mutnedjmet at Turin, the homage of Syria, 
or its goddess, to the throne. The indication of the sex of the animal is surprising at this date. On the ceiling 
of Tomb 65 at Thebes two female (?) sphinxes with long necks and with a lotus on their heads adore the 
setting sun. In my draw ing on pi. XX I have made the tail more leonine than Mrs. Brunton suggests. But it 
does end in a decorated circle in Syria, xviii, pi. 39. ^ Borchardt, Allerhand Kleinigkeiten, pi. 13. 

3 Palace of Minos, iv, pi. 32. ^ M. 79, 150, 152, 166, 167. ^ 1939, p. 163; 1937, p. 708. 

^ Newberry, Beni Hasan, ii, pi. 16. ^ IVI. loi, 118, 148, 149, 155. 

^ M. 195 Cf. the late Cyprian bowl (Perrot-Chipiez, Histoire de VArt, iii, fig. 546), where the outer ring 
seems to reflect the Eastern world, but the central ring and centre, Egyptian ideas. Other bowls of similar 
origin often show^ a like incongruous admixture {op. cit., figs. 547-52). 

^ A lion is the companion in M. 172 and in IVIontet, Byblos, pi. 42. 

M. 154, 172. For the comb on the head of the giA^phon see Evans, op. cit., p. 91 1. >Jote too the square- 
tipped ears or crest of the animal on the painted chariot, Borchardt, loc. cit. In form, colour, spots, and collar 
it closely resembles the cheetah (?) above it. 

“ The line drawings on pis. XX and XXII are only meant to send the student to the beautifully patient copy 
by Mrs. Brunton and to remind him that these panels are twisted, stretched, crumpled up. Her outlines have 
neither been closely followed nor boldly amended, but some attempt has been made to get closer to the original 
design than the present state of the embroidery permits. 




A (front series, pi. XX) 1-3. Here two of the dividing palmettes are used as an object 
of adoration by confronting sphinxes. 

A 4. Two dogs, at least one of them full face as in Egyptian scenes, bring down a 
wild ox. A smaller dog rushes up to join the fray. A plant of the ‘lily’ type pushes up 
stiffly from the ground. 

A 10, 12. These two (pi. XXI) are treated as counter-scenes. A lion runs away with 
a victim thrown over its shoulders {cf. M. 186). An ibex is trydng to break into a gallop, 
though a dog is springing on its back. Fanciful desert plants are shown. 

B (back series, pi. XXII). Only two palmettes are used, cutting off the end panels 
from the central ones. 

B 3, 4, 5. These apparently form one piece of embroidery. The scene changes from 
a group of watchful gazelles to one of flight from the enemy. ^ Three dogs attack a 
gazelle. An ibex and a bull seek to escape in the confusion. Below a lion is at grips 
with a dog (?). 

B 6. A lion seizes an addax (?) by the hind leg. A dog, this time one of the slugi 
breed, leaps at the head of an ibex. 

B 8. A dog pursues an animal (lost). Two lions bring down a wild bull. In general 
there cannot be any serious identification of the animals, details of horns, tails, etc., 
being so insecure. 

^ By negligence I have left the reclining animal incomplete. 

Plate XXII 


3 4 




Scale 2 : 5 

Back. Key to the Panels 

* to* 

»■ .»• .r ■ 

i:. ' 

_■ t; V 

1 -1: ^ ■>- i" ' 

••• I 

V' -’ll. ..-l* 1; "3 


« '■'■■■■ ■ '-w' ■ ; 


■ ;.: . ^ ,? ■ ■ f ^ ‘ ^ 

1. .* • • 1“ • ■ *. 

- 4 V /;- - i : .■• .•'’■'•‘■/'■ h , ? T ,''.'''’1 

J? S-’ • i'i'''. . C.-* ' V J ■ .N % / 

■ V Li ’■ ■ '''' ■*' \ '"■ ■ • .'■ ■ ■ “■ ■ » J/' ^ - 

f .A>k-A -Ov^ A 

^^■. ■ :.'v. ’v;.. /.v: ...,' ■ H^i».<:-5Tv: .T- ■ /■< ^ 

1 .4 ■' . >. ,■ '■ :’r^y{> ■ , ■■ Odo ■ ''si . . ■ ^ -il-i -r- .-W. • •• 

‘ .■ ■■ f ' ' '.■ ' ’..jc.: V 1?^ -jjy ■ 'V ■■ ■ 1 ■ ■ r. - ■ ■ ■'■ . 

*■ ¥ J i !r - v-L’- V .- .■ ' 

' ' ■;" •" ■ J ' s’ 

» ‘.i ■ -^v ' 

' I ■•*/ ■ . ■< 

\ V'' • ■-•i -.s ' 

■ ’I ... ■■•',■■ 

vay. • Vv'-V 

S '■« 

5ca/e I : 2 

Back. The Enibroidered Panels 



While preparing my article on a Coptic Love Charm {JEA xxv, 173 fF.) I made a 
search for earlier examples for comparison, but, strangely enough, I was able to find 
only one belonging to Pharaonic timesA This is a little text written on an ostracon of 
about the time of the Twentieth Dynasty. No translation of it has yet appeared, 
although a facsimile and transcription have been published by Posener, Cat. des 
ostraca hieratiques litter air es de Deir el Medineh, tome i, No. 1057, pis. 31 and 31a. 
The text, though short, ver}' well illustrates the psychology of Ancient Egyptian magic. 
For this reason, and because of the extreme rarity of this class of text, a translation and 
a few notes may interest readers of this journal. 


Hail to thee, O Re<-Harakhte, Father of the Gods! 

Hail to you, O ye Seven Hathors 

Who" are adorned** with strings of red thread! 

Hail to you, ye Gods lords of heaven and earth! 

Come <make)^ so-and-so (f.) born of so-and-so come after me. 

Like an ox after grass, 

Like a servant' after her children. 

Like a drover after his herd! 

If you^ do not make her come after me. 

Then I will set (fire to) Busiris® and burn up (Osiris).* 


a. Posener has the correct reading should be the blob at the top of the 
group being a much abbreviated form of the superfluous r often prefixed to nty in 
Late-Ramesside texts, see Erman, Neudg. Gr. § 839. 

b. must be a syllabic writing of the old word st, to ‘wear’, ‘adorn’, written 
in the Pyramid Texts. 

c. has been omitted by the scribe, who has been guilty of several other stupid, 
but obvious, blunders. 

d. The same phrase again ‘like an ox after grass’ in a prayer to Prec-Harakhte, 
P. Anastasi ii, 1 1 , i . Doubtless a cliche. 

e. It is tempting to emend ‘servant’ to ^5^ ‘mother’, and ^ having some 

resemblance in hieratic. 

^ Unless the definition of a love charm be extended to include the spell published in Schack-Schackenburg, 
Zweiwegebuch, pi. i6, 11--13. Those in Griffith & Thompson, Demotic Magical Papyrus of London and Leyden^ 
are of Roman date, and in any case largely influenced by foreign ideas, particularly Greek. 



/. MS. -w, ‘they’. 

g. Posener transcribes but the facsimile shows that the scribe meant f 1 

although If is very clumsily made with three vertical strokes instead of two. 

h. The last two sentences should be emended on the basis of Pleyte and Rossi, Papyrus 
de Turin, pi. 135, 10, to read (|(p^ also omitted by P. Turin) 

The invocation to the Seven Hathdrs, the Fates of Ancient Egypt, with their seven 
threads, is interesting. One cannot help being reminded of the Kldthes, spinners of 
Destiny in Greek mythology. But there is no evidence that the Hathors were ever 
spinners, and their threads appear to have been solely for the purpose of tying the 
protective knots so commonly used in Egyptian Magic. Compare a similar passage in an- 
other magical text (Pleyte and Rossi, op. aL, pi. 135, 12-13): ^ 

‘The seven daughters of Pre< 
stand making lamentation and tying seven knots in their seven bands {idg).’ It is not 
surprising to meet again the famous threat against Osiris already familiar to us from 
a Turin Papyrus,^ for the Ancient Egyptians are well known to have adopted this attitude 
towards their gods when it suited their purpose. Like human beings the gods were to 
be won over by gifts, or prayers, or threats. 

But why should the magician single out Osiris for punishment if Rec-Harakhte and 
the other gods failed to perform his will ? The answer, I think, lies in the partly mortal 
nature of Osiris. He alone among the gods was deemed to have been slain on earth, 
and, although he had subsequently risen from the dead, his body was still believed to 
be preserved in his tomb at Busiris,^ where it was visited by many pilgrims. Not only 
was Osiris joined to the multitude of Egyptians by a greater spiritual bond, but he was 
physically more within their power than remoter deities like the sun-god. 

^ Referred to in note h. Exactly the same threat, although damaged, in Posener, op. cit.j pi. 27 (No. 1048), 
II. 5-6. 

^ Other towns also laid claim to the possession of some part of the body of Osiris. will tear out his soul 
and annihilate his corpse, and I will set fire to every tomb of his’, Gardiner, Hieratic Papyri in the British 
Museuruy Third SerieSy 1935, p. 73. 

( 133 ) 



The sign ^ for p ‘fledgling’, G 47 in Dr. Gardiner’s sign-list and fig. i below, ^ 
seems from indications on the monuments to represent a duckling. Sometimes, as 
part of a vase decoration, one or more ducklings are shown in the nest with open 
beak and spread wings, the whole forming a symmetrical design with a parent duck 

Fig. 2 Fig. 3 

on each side. An example of this is on the elaborate vase seen among the gifts pre- 
sented to Tuthmosis IV in the Theban tomb (No. 76) of the general Tjenena.- 

The hieroglyph for ss ‘nest’, G 48 in the sign-list, comprises one or three fledg- 
lings drawn in exactly the same manner, but in the synonymous sign ^ (G 49) ducks, 
rather than ducklings, are seen swimming in a pool. The scene in Davies, Deir el 

* From the Theban tomb of Rekhmire< (No. loo), see Newberr>-, Tomb of Rekhmara^ pi. 2, 1 . 13 from right. 

2 A facsimile of my own, unfortunately at present not available for publication, clearly shows the form of the 
fledglings. See, too, Wreszinski, Atlas zur altdg. Kulturgesch.^ pis. 46 (a) (b) ; Hay MSS. 29852, i, fols. 171.183. 



Gebrdwi i, pi. 5, left, provides a good illustration of the former sign, and here a 
duck hovers immediately above the three ducklings in the nest.^ On the north end-wall 
of the tomb of Hekerneheh at Shekh 'Abd el-Kurnah (No. 64) the young prince 
Amenemhet holds the ^-shaped bird in one hand and a duck in the other, but only 
the head and wings of the first are now extant, and the wings of the second, see JEA 
XIV, pi. 12. 

A sculptured example from Abu Gurab now in Berlin (fig. 2) shows the fledgling 
evidently just emerging from the egg, though the disproportionate sizes of bird and 
eggs might rather suggest that the duckling was sitting upon them. Here the shape, 
with the long neck, oval body ending in the incipient up-turned tail, and large splayed 
foot, is very much that of a duckling in nature (fig. 3). Other nestlings were, however, 
drawn by the Egyptians in a similar manner, as for example in the Theban tomb of 
Menna (No. 69), where a young pigeon was probably intended.^ 

The colour of the hieroglyph ^ is often a clear light yellow with blue or black 
markings, the yellow being perhaps meant to represent the down. The fringe of 
little hairs on the breast and under the tail is red on white. The eye is a yellow circle 
with a blue or black pupil. The beak is red, and so is the large foot, which is not 
webbed. But neither are the feet of other aquatic birds webbed in the Egyptian 
pictures, those of the Meydum geese not showing this feature in spite of their remark- 
able fidelity to nature. An alternative colour scheme is sometimes used, giving the 
body a light pink with blue or black markings, the circle of the eye white with a blue 
or black pupil, and the other parts red, as in the first case. A rather exceptional treat- 
ment, when the bird is painted against a yellow background, is that of a pink body 
with no markings but the ends of the tail feathers and claws touched with black 
(Davies, The Tomb of the Vizier Ramose, pi. 45). The same variations of colour are found 
for the quail-chick G 43, the sign for w. Blue and black, and sometimes yellow 
and pink, are interchangeable in Egyptian paintings. 

^ See also Davies, The Tomb of Klenamun, I, pi. 28, where two fledglings in a nest undoubtedly belong to the 
group of ducks on the right. 

^ N, M. Davies, Ancient Egyptian Paintings, pi. 50. 



• • • 


The great hoard of treasure found at Tukh el-Karamus in 1905 included a group of 
108 trichrysa of Ptolemy I and II : a list of these was given to me by the late Mr. C. C. 
Edgar in 1906, but, as I understood that he proposed to publish it, I did not use it. 
It does not, however, appear to have been printed, and no details as to the coins have 
been recorded, beyond the weights of 40 specimens selected for the Alexandria Museum, 
which are given in vol. iv of Svoronos’ Corpus of Ptolemaic coins. As the composition 
of the group is a matter of some interest, I have summarized the list, substituting for 
Edgar’s descriptions references to the numbers in Svoronos, and arranging them in 
his series : the weights, notes on dies, and marks are as given by Edgar. 

Ptolemy I. Series B, a. 

Svor. 1 81 

2 exx. wts. 

(i) 17*70, (2) 17*70. [Different dies.] 

196 A 


(i) 17*80, (2) 17*70. [Different dies.] 



(i) 1^80, (2) 17-80+, (3) 17-85, (4) 17-95.(5) 17-85. (6) 17-85+- 
[Five dies: (i) and (2) same die: (5) punch-marked with circle 
on obverse.] 



(i) 17-80+, (2) 17-80, (3) 17-80, (4) 17-70-, (5) 17-80, (6) 17-85, 
(7) 17-75- [(0. (2). and (3) same die: (4), (5), and (6) same die.] 



(i) 17-75, (2) 17-80. 



(i) 17-80,(2)17-85,(3)17-80, (4) 17-80+, (5) 17-85-, (6) 17-85-, 
(7) 17-80+, (8) 17-85, (9) 17-85, (10) 17-85, (ii) 17-85 + . 
[Different dies: monogram of (ii) indistinct: (2) punch- 
marked with cross on obverse.] 



(i) 17-80. 

Ptolemy 1 1 . 

Series A. 

Svor. 357 

3 exx. 

(i) 17-80, (2) 17-85 + , (3) 17-70. [(2) and (3) same die.] 

365 A 


(i) 17-90-. 



(i) 17-85+, (2) 17-90, (3) 17-90, (4) 17-85, (5) 17-90. [Three dies: 
(3). (4). and (5) same die.] 



(i) 17-80. 

Series E. 

Svor. 537 

I ex. 

(i) 17*85. [Scratched on reverse.] 

Series Z, a. 

Svor. 547 

23 exx. 

(i) 17-80+, (2) 17-80, (3) 17-85, (4) 17-85, (5) 17-85, (6) 17-85+, 

(7) lySs- (8) 1770+, (9) 17-80, (10) 17-85+, (ii) 17-85, 
(12) 17-85, (13) 17-80+, (14) 17-85, (15) 17-85-, (16) 17-85+, 
(17) 17-75- (18) 17-85, (19) 17-85, (20) 17-85, (21) 17-90-, 
(22) 17-80, (23) 17-75. [(i)> (2)- and (3b (5) and (6); (8) and 


Series Z, jS. 

Svor. 551 7 exx. wts. 

558 I 

566 6 

573 2 

583 7 

590 8 

595 3 

Series H (Tyre). 
Svor. 630 A I 

633 A 2 

639 4 

Series H (Sidon). 
Svor. 712 I 

715 A I 


(9); (ii) and (12); (13), (14), (15), (16), and (17); (18) and (19); 
same die for each group.] 

(i) 17-80+, (2) 17-80+, (3) 17-85, (4) 17-90-, (5) 17-85, (6) 
17-85. (7) 17-85 + - [(i). (2), (3). and (4) same die.] 

(i) 17-80. 

(i) 17-80, (2) 17-85, (3) 17-85, (4) 17-90, (5) 17-85, (6) 17-75. 

[(i) and (2) same die: Z scratched on reverse of (3).] 

(1) 17-80, (2) 17-85. 

(1) 17-85, (2) 17-80, (3) 17-85, (4) 17-85, (5) 17-85, (6) 17-85+, 

(7) ^7*85- [(i) and (2) same die.] 

(i) 17-90-, (2) 17-80+, (3) 17-90-, (4) 17-90+, (5) 17-90, 
(6) 17*85, (7) 17*85, (8) 17-90-. [(i) and (2) same die: (7) and 

(8) same die: (7) punch-marked with circle on obverse.] 

(1) 17-75, (2) 17-75. (3) 17-85+- 

(1) 17-80. 

(1) 17-70, (2) 17-70. 

(1) 17-80, (2) 17-75, (3) 17-90. (4) 17-80. [(1) and (2) same die: 
date-letter of (4) badly struck and uncertain.] 

17-75 + - 


The weights given in this list show a noteworthy exactitude; only one coin is 
definitely over 17-9 grammes, and none below 17-7; if 17-8 be taken as the mean, the 
variation is less than one-half per cent, either way. That this is not exceptional in 
Ptolemaic gold coins appears from the weights given by Svoronos: in the series of 
trichrysa represented in this hoard he quotes 71 examples, of which only i is over 
17-9, and 5 below 17-7; but of the latter, two are only just below, weighing 17-68, one 
is quoted from a sale catalogue in which the weights are unreliable, and the lightest, 
which weighs only 17-19, is described as drexvaTepov — i.e. probably an ancient forgery. 
A similar exactitude is shown in the larger mnaeia of the same period : the weights of 
86 are given, the mean being 27-7 grammes; three are over 27-8 and tw'o below 27-6; 
and the later series, which go down to the mnaeia of Ptolemy VIII, keep up the tradi- 
tion. Such a careful adjustment of weight is a thing almost unknown in Greek civic 
coinages of silver; the only instance is in the tetradrachms of Athens, other important 
commercial coinages commonly varying as much as 10 per cent., and the issues of 
minor states even more widely. 

It would appear, however, that this care in securing the exact metal content of the 
coins was exercised by the Alexandrian officials only in the case of gold; the silver 
tetradrachms of the period in question range in weight from 14-40 to 12-15 grammes, 
and later ones are even more irregular in weight and also show a constantly increasing 
debasement, till by the end of the dynasty there is often only one part of silver to three 
of alloy. As for the copper, there seems to have been no attempt to adjust weights; 
the largest copper of Ptolemy II ranged from 105 to 74 grammes, the next size from 


78 to 59, and so on ; as a practical matter, the denominations of copper seem to have 
been distinguished by diameter, not by weight, and for this purpose the flans were cast 
in bevelled moulds before they were struck. 

These facts point definitely to the conclusion that the Ptolemaic gold was designed 
for use in foreign exchange ; the international Greek standard was based on silver, but 
the exceptionally high valuation of silver in Egypt made it impracticable to use the 
same silver currency in external and internal transactions, and so for international 
purposes silver values were expressed in gold currency. The standing of the Ptolemaic 
gold in the third century B.c. was not dissimilar to that of the English sovereign for 
a century after 1816; here also the standard was a silver one in origin, but the pound 
sterling was expressed in gold, until the inflation in the price of gold made it impossible 
to coin sovereigns without loss to the nation. 

It is of interest to examine P. Zeno Cairo 59021 in relation to these facts. The 
papyrus contains a letter to Apollonius, the chief finance minister, from Demetrius, 
who had been directed to strike gold; Demetrius stated that he could recoin foreign 
gold of good weight and trichrysa, but could not handle gold plate or worn gold which 
was refused by the merchants, as he had no means of assaying it; so he asked to be 
provided with skilled assistance. This suggests that the ordinary operations of the 
mint — if it deserves the name — at Alexandria were of a rough-and-ready kind, and its 
products in silver and copper confirm this view ; it was not equal to the task of stri kin g 
coins of exact weight and fineness. If Demetrius got hold of a bunch of trichiy^sa like 
the one from the Tukh el-Karamus hoard, he could manage to restrike them, but that 
was as far as he could go. It is rather surprising to find such inefficiency in the Civil 
Service of Alexandria, which is usually supposed to have been well organized. 

The letter also suggests a question as to the dating of the trichrysa given by Svoronos. 
It was written in 258 B.c., and according to Svoronos the trichrysa of series Z, the 
latest of Ptolemy II, only go down to 266. Some of the coins are undated, others dated; 
and he regards the undated as earlier than the dated. But Demetrius evidently con- 
templated striking trichrysa eight years after the latest of the dated coins ; and it may 
be that some at any rate of the undated coins are later than the dated. The contents 
of the Tukh el-Karamus hoard would support this view: if the coins from the mints 
of Tyre and Sidon are excluded, on account of the distance from their home, there are 
27 dated coins and 30 undated of series Z; the dated are 558 (i), 566 (6), 573 (2), 
583 (7), 590 (8). and 595 (3), the undated 547 (23) and 551 (7). Amongst the dated 
there are four pairs of coins from the same die; amongst the undated one lot of five, 
one of four, one of three, and four of two, with a common die. As the general tendency 
of coins from the same die is to get separated in the course of circulation, the dated 
coins in the hoard had presumably seen more circulation than the undated ; and, unless 
the hoard represents an accumulation over several years, its evidence is in favour of 
the undated coins of series Z being later than the dated. 




In Bk. II, 107, Herodotus reports the attempt to put Sesostris to death by fire and the 
king’s escape. He says that the would-be sacrificer ‘piled wood round the house and 
set it on fire. When Sesostris was aware of this, he took counsel at once with his wife, 
whom (it was said) he was bringing with him; and she counselled him to lay two of 
his six sons on the fire and to make a bridge over the burning w^hereby they might pass 
over the bodies of the two and escape. This Sesostris did; two of his sons were thus 
burnt, but the rest were saved alive with their father.’ 

The king’s escape from the fire and the death of the two substitutes was clearly a 
fertility sacrifice; for Sesostris, in this case at any rate, represents Ramesses II who was 
lauded by his courtiers as a fertility-king, and under whom there was a great resurgence 
of the fertility-religion;^ the attempt on the king took place at the end of nine years, ^ 
which is well known as one of the regulation periods of the fertility-religion ; the death 
was by fire, as so often in these cases; Manetho, as quoted by Josephus and Eusebius, 
records that the king, ‘Sethosis who is also called Ramesses’ as they call him, was 
summoned by the priest ‘who was appointed over the sacrifices of Egypt’ ; the guards 
made little or no attempt to save the king (Diodorus); the attempt was made by his 

^ Wainwright, The Sky ^Religion in Egypt ^ 62, 72, 75. The Sesostris story is compounded of 

many elements, the details of which are mainly indeed taken from the deeds of Darius I, Posener, Bull, de d'arch. or. du Caircy xxxiv (1934), 78-81. Though the name Sesostris is taken from that of Sen- 
wosret of the Twelfth Dynasty (Sethe, Untersuchungeny ii, 8) the exploits themselves were attributed to Ramesses 
II, and were reflections of his conquest of the many Asiatic peoples at Kadesh, Thus from Egyptian sources 
we have the late story of Bentresh of Bakhtan, which is founded on Ramesses IPs Hittite war and his marriage 
with the Hittite princess (Breasted, Ancie^it RecordSy ill, §§429 ff. ; Posener, op. cit.y 75-7) and ascribes to 
Ramesses far-reaching influences in Asia. Tacitus, Annals y ii, 60, says that the world-wide conquests with the 
vast army were made by ^King Rhamses’, and were sculptured on the temples at Thebes. Diodorus, i, 47, 
speaking of the Ramesseum sculptures of the Battle of Kadesh says that Osymandyas {Wsr-mfn-r<' , i.e. Ramesses 
II, Sethe, op. cit.y 6) led a vast army against the Bactrians, i.e. against distant parts of Asia. It is apropos of the 
two colossi of Ramesses II before the temple at Memphis that Herodotus, li, no, tells the story of Sesostris, 
and Diodorus, i, 57, that of Sesoosis, of his large army, world-wide conquests, and the attempt on his life. 
Finally Josephus, Contra Apionenty i, §§ 98-102, quoting from Manetho, tells the story of ‘Sethosis who is 
also called Ramesses*. Eusebius unfortunately cut the story in two, giving the latter part to ‘Sethosis who is 
also called Ramesses* correctly, but transferring the first part to the Twelfth Dynasty, no doubt on the strength 
of the name Sesostris. 

2 The tradition of the nine years* period is strong. Diodorus says that the attempt at sacrifice took place 
at Pelusium on Sesoosis* return from a victorious campaign (i, 57), which in i, 55, he says lasted nine years. 
Again, Eusebius in his quotations from Manetho also says the campaign took nine years in that part of the 
story which he gives to Sesostris (J. B. Aucher, Eusebii Chronicon Bipartitunty i, 21 1), but in the part given to 
‘Sethosis who is also called Ramesses* he, like Josephus {Contra Apionenty i, 100, 10 1) whose extract from 
Manetho he is here copying, says the king was recalled to Pelusium ‘after a considerable time* (Aucher, op. cit.y 
233). The duration of Sesostris’ campaign is given again as nine years in Syncellus* two copies of Eusebius* 
extract from Manetho (Dindorf, Georgius Syncellus in Corp. Script. Hist. Byz.y Pars vii, i, pp. m, 112). 



brother, the would-be successor to the throne; finally though they all mention that 
the king took his kingdom again, or merely tell of his later acts, there is no mention 
of vengeance on the brother except by Herodotus in passing,' which would be extra- 
ordinary if it were merely a case of attempted murder. Though not an annual New 
Year ceremony, this very evident fertility sacrifice corresponds with the, presumably 
annual, human sacrifices which w'ere anciently carried out in Egypt by fire ‘in the 
Dog-days’, i.e. at the Rising of Sirius, or in other words at the New Year,^ and were 
perpetuated in modern Egypt at the festival of Nauruz, equally the New Year.^ Here 
the Mock King, the Abu Nauruz, was conducted in procession to the fire, out of the 
midst of which in modern Egypt he w'as allowed to jump, leaving his insignia behind 
to be burned. 

In mentioning this old custom of human sacrifices Manetho and Diodorus make no 
mention of two victims, but as they are speaking generally, the one simply says that 
‘they used to burn living men to ashes’, and the other that ‘anciently men who were 
similarly coloured to Typhon were sacrificed by the kings’.^ The modern Egyptian 
survival has reverted to the single victim, as was usual in other countries. On this 
occasion the picture of the procession drawn by one visitor shows only a single Mock 
King or Abu Nauruz ‘Father of the New Year’ as the victim was called, and another 
observer only speaks of him in the singular.^ In reporting the Sesoosis-Sesostris 
incident Diodorus, i, 57 confirms the detail of burning down the house, or ‘tent’ as 
he calls it, but as regards the sacrifice he merely tells that the king himself escaped, 
leaving it to be inferred that all the rest of the royal family perished in the flames. 
Though Josephus and Eusebius add the important pieces of information which have 
been mentioned above, they are not interested in the attempt on the king’s life and 
finish their extract from Manetho with the return to Egypt and the fact that he took 
his own kingdom again. 

It is Herodotus’ account which concerns us here. Hitherto his mention of two 
victims would have seemed a mere mistake, which has crept into the story through 
some chance, such as the number of statues he was shown at Memphis, or some similar 
accident.^ But in view of what follows it becomes much more probable that it was the 
result of the dual capacity of the Pharaoh as King of Upper Egypt and King of Lower 
Egypt. In any case, it was clearly not chance, but a true record, that two substitutes 
are named instead of the usual one, as well as the curious and, as one would have 
thought, unnecessary procedure of burning down the house, or tent as Diodorus calls 
it, with the victims inside. Until recently I had been able to find only two parallels 
to the destruction of the house for the consummation of the sacrifice. One was in 
Sweden on the occasion of a famine which was ascribed to the lack of sacrifices by 
the king. The people, therefore, ‘surrounded his house, and burnt him in it, giving 

* For the references and discussion see Wainwright, op. cit., 47, 48. 

2 Op. cit.y 60; Plutarch, De hide et Osiridey § 73 quoting from Manetho. Diodorus, i, 88, mentions the 
human sacrifices, but gives no particulars either as to the date or the method of carrying them out. He only 
says the victims must be ‘red', the colour suitable to Seth-Typhon the storm-god. 

^ Wainwright, op. cit.y 59, 60. 

* Op. cit.y S3* ^ 59 P^* facing p. 60. 

^ Cf. op. cit.y 50, n, 2. 



him to Odin as a sacrifice for good crops’d The second comes from Greece. At the 
Stepterion festival at Delphi a hut was set up over the threshing-floor every nine years. 
It imitated the dwelling of a king, and contained a table of first-fruits. The royal hut 
was set on fire, and the table overturned, by a boy, who fled and returned crowned in 
triumph as the young New Year.^ Both of these are singularly apt. They both are 
fertility sacrifices; in one case the king himself is burned in his palace; in the other 
the imitation palace is burned with its contents. The Greek festival is specially like 
the drama of Sesostris, for it took place at the end of a nine-year period, and the palace 
that was destroyed was a temporar}’ one set up for the purpose. It is like the Nauruz 
festival in bringing in the New Year. In neither of these cases, however, was there 
more than the usual single victim. The sacrifice of two victims was peculiar to Egypt — 
to the Two Lands. 

Hence it is of exceptional interest that not only the burning of the temporary hut 
set up for the purpose, but also the mock sacrifice of a pair of victims inside it has 
actually survived on African soil, and with strong suspicions of an Egyptian-Ptolemaic 
origin. This is among the aborigines of the island of Zanzibar, among whom it takes 
place at the Nauruz or the New Year, like the Egyptian ceremony. 

In describing the life of the aborigines of Zanzibar and Pemba IMr. Ingrams says 
that the people of Makunduchi have some customs peculiar to themselves. One is that 
at the New Year festival, which is called Naoruz or Siku ya Mwaka ‘they build a small 
hut or banda of dried coconut leaves and put two people inside. They then set fire to 
the hut and throw stones into the flames. The two men are supposed to remain inside, 
but in reality escape unseen through the back of the hut’.^ 

Whereas the Swedish and Greek cases just quoted were very good parallels to the 
Sesostris sacrifice, here at Zanzibar the parallel is complete, for we have not only the 
burning down of a temporary hut, but also the two victims instead of the usual one. 
Moreover, the fact that the house is only a temporary hut set up for the occasion, and 
is made of dry leaves, may account for Diodorus’ variation in calling Herodotus’ ‘house’ 
a ‘tent’ and the fuel ‘reeds’ instead of Herodotus’ ‘wood’. Hence the structure put 
up for Sesostris was probably the ceshshah (ilc-) which may be seen everywhere in 
the fields of modern Egypt. This would be the Egyptian equivalent of the Zanzibari 
‘small hut or banda of dried coconut leaves’, for it is a temporary residence of dry 
maize stalks, or no doubt of reeds if they were handy, and would burn furiously if set 

There is much evidence to make it practically certain that the custom at Zanzibar 
was introduced there in Greek times and under Ptolemaic influence. In this case it 
would actually be a modern survival of the Egyptian custom itself, and not merely an 
independent, but parallel, occurrence. In the first place the custom is clearly ancient, 
for it is peculiar to the aborigines of the island, the newer-comers not sharing in it. 
Then it is well established that the influence of the Ptolemies was steadily spreading 
down the Red Sea and out along the east African coast. This was due to their desire 

^ S. Laing, The Heimskringla (London, 1889), i, 323, and cf. Wainwright, op. cit., 48, n. 2. 

2 Jane E. Harrison, Themis, 426, 427. ^ Ingrams in Man, 1925, 141. 



for elephants for their wars, and caused them to maintain hunting establishments all 
along the coast as far away as Cape Guardafui. Ptolemy II Philadelphus sent out 
Satyros and Eumedes,^ and perhaps also a certain Pythagoras.- Ptolemy III set up an 
inscription at Adulis saying that he caught elephants like his father.^ One of his chief 
huntsmen was Lichas, whom he sent out in the early years of his reign."^ Another was 
P^holaos whose clerk at the end of the reign, in 223 b.c., was given a draft on the royal 
banker at Edfu for the pay of the expedition.’ Pythangelos is also often mentioned in 
the correspondence of this reign.-^ Ptolemy IV Philopator sent out Lichas again,^ and 
also Charimortos and his relief Alexander, the first and last of whom have left us in- 
scriptions.^ Leon was also probably sent by him.^ Charimortos was at work again 
under Ptolemy V Epiphanes.- 

Fortunately we can trace these peoples’ activities, and so we know that they took 
them right down as far as Cape Guardafui, the Horn of Africa. In Ptolemy H’s reign 
Satyros founded Philotera-Kosseir, Strabo, xvi, iv, § 5, and Eumedes founded 
Ptolemais Epitheras,^ three thousand stadia north of Adulis,® hence probably near 
Suakin. Ptolemy HI went farther south, to Adulis itself which is near Axum in 
Abyssinia and south of the modern Massawa in Eritrea. He even went outside the 
Straits of Bab el-VIandeb, where his chief huntsman, Pytholaos, left his name (Strabo, 
XVI, iv, §§ 14, 15). In the same reign Pythangelos organized two hunting-grounds in 
the same district, one nearly as far as the Straits, Strabo, xvi, iv, § 14, and the other 
outside them, Strabo, xvi, iv, §§ 14, 15. Pytholaos and Pythangelos were by no means 
the only ones to pass outside the Red Sea, for besides them Lichas, Leon, and Chari- 
mortos all left their names along the coast as far as Notu-ceras, Cape Guardafui. ^ 
Ptolemy H reigned from 283 to 245 B.c., and Alexander’s inscription can be dated from 
internal evidence to 208-206 B.c.,'° and Ptolemy V Epiphanes reigned from 203 to 
181 B.c. 

Thus, Ptolemaic influence was stretching down towards Cape Guardafui during 
much of the third century b.c. A hundred years later this influence had reached right 
down to Zanzibar, for a coin of Ptolemy X Soter, 115-80 B.c., has actually been found at 

^ Rostovtzeff in Archiv fiir Papyriisforschung, iv (1908), 303. A Satyros, who is no doubt this one, made a 
dedication at the desert temple of Redeslyah, probably on his way out, see Hail in Classical ReviezVy xii (1898), 
280, n. 2. “ Rostovtzeff, op. cit.y 303. 

^ The inscription itself has not yet been recovered, but is known to us from a copy made in the sixth centuiy' 
A.D. by the monk Cosmas Indicopleustes when on his travels, J. W. McCrindle, The Christian Topography of 
CosmaSy an Egyptian Monk (Hakluyt Society, 1897), 57, 58. ^ Rostovtzeff, op. cit.y 302. 

^ E. R. Bevan, A History of Egypt under the Ptolemaic DyiiastVy 176. 

^ Hall, op. cit.y 275, 276, 280. 

Strabo, XVI, iv, § 7. A hieroglyphic inscription was set up by Ptolemy 1 1 at Pithom recording the voyage 
of an elephant-hunter, who founded a town, named it after the king, ploughed fields there, captured elephants, 
and brought them back by ship, Naville, The Store-City of Pithom, pL x, 11 , 22-4, and p. 18, or better, Brugsch 
in ZAS XXXII, 85, 86. The naming of the city after the king shows that the inscription refers to Eumedes 
and Ptolemais, and not to SatyTOS and Kosseir. Moreover, no fields could have been ploughed in the hopeless 
desert at Kosseir. In any case corn-growing was not a success at these southern places, for the expeditions had 
to be kept supplied from Egypt. We have a letter written from Berenice in 224 b.c. about the distress caused 
to one of Pythangelos’ (apparently) settlements through the shipwreck of a cargo of grain, Rostovtzeff, op. cit., 
303; Bevan, op. cit.y 176. * W. H. Schoff, The Periplus of the Erythraean Seay 22, § 4. 

^ Strabo, xvi, iv, § 15, Deire being at the Straits themselves, cf. § 4. 10 Hall, op. cit., 275. 



Msasani on the mainland, described as being a little north of Dar es-Salam, which 
would place it a little south of Zanzibar^ By the middle of the first century a.d. trading 
voyages from Egypt were being regularly undertaken, in which ships called at the 
various ports all down the coast as far as Rhapta and Menuthias, places at present 
unidentified but clearly in the neighbourhood of Zanzibar. This is shown by the 
Periplus, which was written about the year a.d. 60,^ and gives the sailing instructions 
and the imports and exports of each place. The same document says that a colony of 
Greeks was by that time established on the island of Socotra, where they formed part 
of the cosmopolitan trading community. ^ 

In view of this steady advance of Egyptian-Ptolemaic influence some of the customs 
peculiar to the aborigines of Makunduchi in the island of Zanzibar take on a special 
significance. The one, which has just been discussed, of simulating the sacrifice of a 
pair of victims at the New Year festival and of burning down a hut to do it, does not 
stand alone as coming from Ptolemaic Egypt. Another is clearly the dance to exorcize 
a sea-devil, stated to be foreign, who came in a canoe holding a trident in his hand. 
The dance is performed with boats, paddles, and various weapons, one of which is the 
un- African trident. As Mr. Ingrams says, one cannot but see the Greek god Poseidon 
in the trident-bearing, foreign sea-devil.'^ As a matter of fact Poseidon had been 
worshipped on the Abyssinian coast at some time before a.d. 522, in which year^ Cosmas 
copied another inscription at Adulis besides the above-mentioned one of Ptolemy III. 
This inscription records the conquests of an Axumite king whose name has been lost, 
who says among other things that he ‘offered sacrifice to Zeus and to Ares and to Posei- 
don, whom I entreated to befriend all who go down to the sea in ships’.^ There is at 
least one more custom still observed in the neighbourhood of Zanzibar which clearly 
originated in Egypt. It is that, inland from Mafia Island in the Ulanga Valley, the 
Wandamba consider that it is good for a pregnant woman to eat hippopotamus meat.’ 
In Egypt the hippopotamus was sacred to Seth the storm- and fertility-god, the female 
hippopotamus, Thoeris, was his concubine.^ It is more important still at the moment 
that she was patroness of pregnancy and childbirth.® In modern Egypt native would-be 
mothers have discovered her well-known black, or dark-green, basalt statue of Twenty- 
sixth Dynasty date which is now in the Cairo Museum, They come there to rub it and 

^ Ingrams in Man, 1925, 140. This is no isolated phenomenon, for a Jewish copper coin of the almost 
contemporary, but somewhat earlier, Simon Maccabaeus, 143-136 B.C., has been dug up at Marianhill behind 
the harbour of Durban. This is right down in Natal, farther south from Zanzibar than Zanzibar is from Cape 
Guardafui, and comparatively not very far from the southern extremity of Africa. The coin had been very little 
used, and stone implements were found in the same stratum, Otto and Stratmann in Anthropos, iv (1909), 168, 169. 

* W. H. Schoff, op. cit,j 15. 

3 Schoff, op. cit.y 34, § 30. For the identification of Dioscorida as Socotra see 133. 

^ Ingrams, op, cit.y 140. The tridents are made of iron. 5 McCrindle, op. cit.. Introduction, p. x. 

^ op, cit.y 66. 7 Hodgson injourn. Roy. Anthr. Inst,y LVi, 65. 

® Plutarch, De hide et Osiride, § 19; Roeder in Roscher, Lexicon, s.v. Thueris, col. 889, c. In Greek times 
her cult was specially strong at Seth’s city of Oxyrhynchus, Rusch in PW, s.v. Thoeris, col. 304. 

^ Seligman and Murray in Man, 1911, No. 73; Roeder, op. cit., cols. 894-7; Rusch, op. cit., col. 303. 

Daressy, Statues de divinites. No. 39145; Maspero, Guide to the Cairo Museum (trans. Quibell) 5th edn., 
190, No. '1 01 6 and fig. 56. For the shrine in which it was found see Roeder, Naos, No. 70027. It is also fig. 2, 
pi. H of Seligman and Murray’s article. 



then rub themselves. This, however, can hardly be a survival from ancient Egypt, but 
need only be a case of self-evident sympathetic magic. 

Thus it is certain that the east African coast received much influence from Egypt 
in Ptolemaic times. Hence anything of an Egyptian nature that is found there can 
confidently be derived from that country. Thus the fact that a ceremony is still 
carried on by the aborigines of Zanzibar including two unusual features which are 
reported of Sesostris in Egypt, makes it certain that these are really derived from Egypt. 
It also makes it certain that ancient Egypt really had a form of the world-wide sacrifice 
of the king that was peculiar to itself. Its peculiarity consisted in the sacrifice of two 
victims instead of the usual one. No doubt one was required as a substitute for the 
Pharaoh as King of Upper Egypt, and the other as a substitute for him as King of 
Lower Egypt. The same amelioration of the horror of the original sacrifice has taken 
place at Zanzibar as in modern Egypt for Abu Nauruz. In both cases the victims are 
nowadays allowed to escape out of the fire which has been lighted round them. The 
Zanzibar ceremony has, however, retained the old characteristics which the modern 
Egyptian one has lost. There the house or tent is still burned down and the two 
substitutes still play their part. But they probably do it without any memory of the 
august personage whom they represent. 

( 144 ) 



I. The idiomatic expressions hr tp, tp nur 

Egyptian lexicography in its present stage suffers chiefly from two defects : first, that 
to many words, such as names of plants, birds, garments, implements, occupations, no 
meaning, except within the limits of a rather large category, can be attached with 
confidence ; secondly, that although the meanings of many words and phrases have been 
ascertained fairly closely, for us they are still synonymous with other words and phrases, 
which makes it probable that we do not understand them exactly. Further progress 
with the study of some words of the former class seems to be at present impossible; 
we have, for example, a few occurrences of a word for a kind of plant, and we may be 
sure that the plant meant is known to us, but the data for identification are lacking, and 
we can only await new examples of the word in contexts which will tell us more about 
the differentiae of the plant meant. For some words and phrases of the second class the 
prospects are more hopeful, for probably in many cases the material for a more precise 
determination of the meaning is accessible in known texts, and only requires careful 
study for distinctions of meaning or usage to emerge. This may be specially true of 
some short phrases of the kind which are often called ‘compound prepositions’ ; two 
of these are dealt with here. 

I . Hr tp > hr ffdr > g&.'su-, 

Literally ‘under the head of’, this phrase means ‘beside’ in the quite special sense of 
a person or thing being beside a recumbent person. The following examples are 
known to me. 

A. Old Egyptian. 

(1) ‘It is a reminder of (the time when) a messenger of Behesti came for some leather 
while I was sitting beside you {m zvn-i hms-k hr tp-k) . . . and when you said “May the 
wood of this my bed which bears me . . .” ’, Gardiner & Sethe. Egn. Letters to the Dead 
I, 2, with XVI, 147. 

B. Middle Egyptian. 

(2) ‘He found him lying {sdr) on a mat . . ., a slave standing beside him massaging (?) 
him {hmw hr tp-f hr rmrm-f), another rubbing his feet.’ P. Westcar, 7, 14-16. 

(3) ‘The Majesty of this god came beside this High Priest of Memphis’ {iyn hm n ntr 
pn hr tp zvr hrp hmwt pn). BM No. 147 (Stela of Taimhotep), 1 . 9. The High Priest 
was asleep; see pp. 2-3 above. 

C. Demotic.^ 

(4) ‘A recumbent female figure, . . . two images of Anubis being bv her feet’ 

^ I have no example of the phrase in Late Egyptian. 


H 5 

{wft rpyt iws sdr, . . . iw twt 2 n ’Inp hr dfdi rd-s). P. Fun. Rhind 2, legend of vignette 
of p. 3; see Moller, Die beiden Totenpapyrus Rhind, 56, bottom. Note that here the 
presence of ‘head’ in the phrase is forgotten. 

(5) ‘And you lie down {mtwk sdr) on a rush mat. . . . Then he makes answer to 
you by dream. . . . Formula . . . “O great god . . . come in beside me{im r hnw hr d^di-iy\' 
P. Dem. Mag., 5, 17-21. 

D. Coptic. 

(6) ‘The living will go beside the dead {sic}) uucTJU.e^'YT) saying “Arise”.’ 

Apoc. Elias, ed. Steindorff, A text, 31, ii. 

(7) ‘And I will stretch thee upon the earth . . . and I will cause all the birds to be 
beside thee’ aw-scoK ; im ae). Ezekiel, B text, ed. Tattam, xxxii. 4. 

(8, 9) ‘“When thou arisest in the morning, the monk’s habit which thou wilt find 
beside thee (.^a.-xcok), put it upon . . . Shenute”. . . . And Apa Pj 5 l arose in the morn- 
ing, and he took the monk’s habit which he had found beside him . . .’ 

Sinuthii Vita, ed. Leipoldt, ii, 10. 20. 

No doubt in the earlier language hr tp was still used with conscious reference to the 
head end, so to speak, of a recumbent person; on Middle Kingdom coffins we find the 
following speeches of Nut to the recumbent deceased: ‘I place Isis by thy head {hr 
tp-k) for thee’, and ‘I place Nephthys by thy feet {hr rdzvi-ki) for thee’, Lacau, Sarco- 
phages . . . {CCG), p. 201 (28055), ^tc., quoted in Gardiner & Sethe, op. cit., 14. Compare 
the frequent pictures of the two goddesses standing at the head and feet of the mummy 

And hr tp was also used with quite literal meaning. In Middle Egyptian we have 
examples in Bk. Dead, Spell 162 (Lepsius, Totenbuch), title and 11 . 6, 7, 9. In the 
rubric directions are given for a picture of the celestial cow Iht to be drawn upon a 
sheet of new papyrus which is to be placed hr tp-f. This certainly means ‘under his 
(the deceased’s) head’,i for hypocephali bear pictures of this cow, and are inscribed 
with extracts from this spell. We must therefore take hr tp elsewhere in the spell as 
referring to the generation of heat under the head of the deceased, and not beside him. 
The Coptic has a number of meanings other than that given above, 

the commonest of these being ‘in advance of’, in space or time. 

In the light of the idiomatic meaning of hr tp we can doubtless interpret the old title 
which is written sometimes sometimes but which must be read hri tp nsw, 
as was shown in Gardiner & Sethe, op. cit., 15, from a passage in the stela of Tjetji 
(BM 614, 1 . 4; cf. also Blackman in JEA xvii, 56). The hri tp nsw was doubtless 
‘chamberlain’ in the archaic sense of ‘an officer who attended the king in his bedroom’ 
{NED, S.V.). That it implies an intimate attendance on the king is shown by the 
passage from Tjetji quoted Gardiner & Sethe, loc. cit . : sk wi m bik-f n dt-f, hri tp-f n 
wn msr ‘I being his personal servant, his veritable chamberlain’. 

* The scribe of this papyrus seems to have tried to show that the phrase is here to be taken literally by writing 
tp all four times in this phrase as ^ I the determinative ^ being used with this word in only four other places 
(17, 18; 78, 40; 97, 2; 154, 13) in the 165 spells of the papyrus; full references in Lieblein, Index, alphab. du 
Livre des Morts publ. par R. Lepsius^ s.v. 




2. Tp mic. 

Literally ‘on the temple’, this phrase means ‘accompanying’, ‘escorting’, and 
expresses the spatial relation of a moving person or thing to a moving person beside 
him or it. I have the following examples, all Middle Egyptian. 

(i, 2) From the well-known inscription, El Bersheh i, pi. 14, accompanying the 
scene of dragging the colossal statue of Dhuthotpe. ‘I came to fetch it, rejoicing, . . . 
boats equipped with good things accompanying my army of young men, troops bearing 
lances escorting it’ {hrimja rpruo m spssw tp true n msr-i n nfrw, dtmw hr skw tp mtr-f). 
The statue is of course in motion ; it is evidently being transported along the bank of 
the Nile or a canal, and barges laden with refreshments of various kinds are keeping 
up with the ‘army of young men’ who are seen hauling the statue on pi. 15. ‘Troops 
bearing lances’ are shown on pi. 13; they presumably form a guard of honour to the 
colossus. Cf. Gardiner, Notes on .. . Sinuhe, 92, where this passage is similarly 

(3) ‘I went forth from the Palace in gladness . . . (lacuna) . . . my city rejoicing along 
with me’ {niwt-i hr nhm tp tnte-i). Rif eh 7, 16. 

(4) Sinuhe, B 243 ff. ‘There came a capable head-caterer of the Palace, with gifts 
from the King for the Asiatics who had come in charge of me to conduct me to the 
Roads of Horus. . . . Every butler was at his task. I set out and sailed, kneading and 
straining being done beside me {sbb rth tp mtr-i), until I reached the landing-place of 
Itj-tawi.’ Sinuhe will have travelled, with a few personal attendants, on a passenger- 
boat, accompanying which was such a ‘kitchen boat’ as that found by the MMA Expedi- 
tion among the tomb-models of Meketre^, and described by Winlock in Bull. MMA, 
Dec. 1920, Pt. II, 30;' on this kitchen boat the beer was brewed. Gardiner, Notes on .. . 
Sinuhe, 92, would transpose sbb eth tp mte-i, making it follow immediately after wdpw 
nb hr irtf, and so make the brewing take place before Sinuhe set sail, on the ground 
that the two phrases are inseparable. I do not agree with this, for wdpw nb hr irtf may 
well describe the busy preparations for the journey apart from the brewing, which was 
done en route. This was the view of Maspero, Mhnoires de Sinouhit, 72 : ‘On lui fit de 
la biere fraiche, de la bouza, tout le long du voyage.’ I am not convinced that Egyptian 
beer would keep [buza does not), and the journey by water from El-Kantarah to Lisht 
will have taken some time. 

(5) De Morgan, Cat. Mon. i, 66 (another bad copy Rec. Trav. xv, 178-9), 11 . 
9-12. From an inscription of Tuthmosis IV describing his expedition to quell a 
revolt in Nubia. ‘After this His Majesty proceeded to overthrow ... in Nubia, 
valorous in his boat . . . like Re' when he shows himself in the Mesenktet bark . . . 
full of red and green cloth, horses in ranks accompanying him {htrw m skw tp nurf), 
his army with him {msrf hnrf) ... the fleet, equipped, following him.’ Evidently 
the king was proceeding by water, and the chariotry was keeping abreast of him on the 
bank; cf. ex. i. 

* After pointing out that cooking meals on a passenger-boat would have been very inconvenient, he says : 
‘The kitchen therefore was upon a second boat which followed behind and was moored alongside at meal 
times. On board women ground flour ; men baked. . . .* 


H 7 

Wd., Belegst., s.v. gives two examples of a phrase m tp rnsr with which I can do 
nothing.^ Anyhow this phrase, with m before tp, is a different one; here tp will of course 
be a noun. Tp miC occurs in P. Ebers, 99, 16, in the dual, as parts of the head.^ 

II. Tt m ‘to take possession of’ or the like 

The idiomatic use of though it has several times been implicitly recognized 

by translators (of exx. i, 2, 4, ii, 13 below), is not given in Wb., and so far as I know 
has never been pointed out; it therefore seems worth while to put its existence on 
record, illustrating it with examples in which the literal meaning ‘to take away from’ 
seems to be excluded. 

1. ‘I cause them to see Thy Majesty as the Lord of the Pinion,’ it m dggt-f r mrr-f 
‘who takes possession of what he sees as much as he wishes’. Urk., iv, 617, 9 (Poetic 
Stela of Tuthmosis III). 

2. ‘His (Ref’s) lips trembled, all his members quaked,’ mtwt it-n-s (var. its) m iwf-f 
‘the poison, it took possession of his flesh.’ Pleyte & Rossi, Pap. Turin, 132, 7 = P. Ch. 
Beatty xi, rt., i, 12 (Legend of Ref and Isis). 

3. Nb zor hr itt m iwtt nbs ‘The great lord takes possession of that which has no lord.’ 
Peas., B I, 92-3. 

4. Hnm-t m iwf-f, rd-t m tp-f it-t m wpt-f ‘Thou (the uraeus) unitest with his flesh, 
thou growest upon his head, thou takest possession of the crown of his head’. Erman, 
Hymnen an d. Diadem, p. 53 (20, 1-2). 

5. ‘I have come into this land,’ it-n-i m rdwi-i ‘having got control over my feet’. 
Bk. Dead, Spell 17 (Nu), 109. 

6. ’Ink .. .it m Dst hryt ‘lam... one who has taken possession of the nether De’et.’ 
Lacau, Textes Rel., 19, 14. 

7. ‘Orion has said to the Great Bear:’ it m sifp-k, iti-i m sfip-i “‘take possession of 
thy pool (?), and I will take possession of my pool (?), that we may make a place for 
this N.’’ ’ Lacau, Textes Rel., 20, 85-92. The meaning is somewhat obscure to me. 

8. ‘He (the serpent) set me down intact;’ wdi-kwi, nn itt im-i ‘I was unharmed, not 
being overpowered.’"^ Sh. S., 79-80. 

9. ‘He (Sesostris) is a master of grace, great in sweetness;’ it-n-f m mrwt ‘he has 
gained love.’ Sinuhe, R 90 = G 46. B has here ( 1 . 66) it-n-f mrwt with similar meaning.® 
The ‘love’ is that felt for the king by his subjects ; the text continues ‘his city loves him 
more than itself.’ 

10. ‘Behold, Egypt has, alas, poured^ water to the ground ;’ it n-fnht r m mnr ‘strength 

• A phrase m iw^vd (if that, and not m gstvi, be the correet reading oi c=^^) occurs Urk. ill, 4, 5 (Naples 
Stela); ‘they (the Asiatics) killed very many on both sides of me (w mirwi-i) without any one raising his hand 
against me/ 

2 The difference between 7nf<' and tp (noun) is perhaps that the former is the whole of the temple, the 
latter the top of it. 

3 ^ ‘To take away from* a person is not it m but it m^<‘. 

s Omission of m here perhaps due to initial m of mrwt. 

^ After stt ^ is to be read, a further determinative, not i— u . wi is not uncommon in this manuscript, but 
elsewhere regularly has a low^ sign (usually another determinative) over it. 



of hand takes to itself possession of misery.’ Admonitions, 7, 5. I do not understand 
the relevance of the first sentence (my ‘alas’ is meant to convey the force of the idiom 
zvi r) ; the second doubtless means that the strong have subjugated the helpless. Note 
the use of the ethic dative here. 

11. ‘The tribes of the Libyans are strewn upon the desert' like mice ’ . . . tt{t) 
im-sn mi drzvt ‘[the troops of his Majesty, or the like] take possession of them like kites.’ 
Ann. Serv., xxvii, 22, 1 . 13 (stela of Merenptah). 

12. The king, in the second year of his reign, is itzc m nszvyt-f {}) nt hhzo m rnpzvt 
‘one who has taken possession of his kingship of millions of years’. Urk., iv, 86, 8 
(Tombos Stela). 

13. Hnm-n-i m nhtzvf, it-n-i m shm-f ‘I partook of his (Amun’s) strength, I took 
possession of his power.’ Mariette, Karnak, 35, 1 . 49. If, as I suppose, the two sen- 
tences are in parallelism, the literal meaning of it m is here almost excluded.^ 

14. ‘I applied my heart to what he (the king) said, I did not neglect what he had 
commanded me;’ it-n-i m tryt hnr mtyt. Louvre, C 55, 14 (Prisse, Mon., 17); cf. 
Urk., IV, 1195, 10; so too in the much corrected stela Stockholm 55; the parallel text 
Lyons 88 omits the sentence here in question. I cannot translate this,^ but the idiom 
seems clearly to be present. The text continues ‘I have reached my-present-condition 
inn) through modesty and quietude.’ Tryt, mtry have bad meanings in Coffin Texts, i, 
173, c, where they are associated with ‘sin’, ‘crookedness’, ‘enemy’, &c. 

' a"**]! j Lefebvre ‘digues’ but 4— c here is undoubtedly a faulty transcription of hieratic r^ . 

^ Compare, however, it m shvt'fy probably ‘conquering by his (own) power', Urk. iii, i lo, 1 1 ; it m shni'f m 
Vw nhw ‘conquering by his (own) power in all lands’, ‘Golden Horus’ name of Amenophis IL 

^ Piehl, Inscrr. hierogl.y i, Comm., 13 : ‘J’ai possede la moderation et I’equite.’ The idiom is possibly present 
in mnh rhy itt m wih ib ‘excellent in knowledge, possessing (?) patience (?)’, Statue of Amenhotpe son of Hapu 
(Cairo Cat. Gen. 583), 9. 



The following letter has been received from Dr. Robert Eisler; 

T have read with great interest Dr. Chatley’s paper on Egyptian astronomy in the 
last issue of the Journal. I have been studying the subject for a long time and am still 
occupied with it in connexion with my work on the so-called Salmeschoiniaka Papyrus 
in the Brit. Mus. I have been able to show {OLZ xxxv, 665 ff., “Das astrologische 
Bilderbuch Salme sakanakke”) that this text is a Greek translation — entitled CAAME- 
CAXANAKAI, i.e. “Images of the seal-bearers” — of a cuneiform text describing astral 
calendar demons (super-constellations) such as those described on the so-called D-D- 
tablet, likewise in the British Museum, edited in English by R. Campbell Thompson 
{Devils and Spirits in Babylonia, ii, 146 ff.) and in German by P. Jensen (Keilschr. Bibl. 
VI, 2, 2-9; T-13*.) 

T can show that all the details of the planispheres of Denderah and Athens (Gundel, 
Dekane, pi. 13), which Dr. Chatley considers as “obviously Greek”, and most of those 
hitherto supposed to be Egyptian are dependent in every detail on cuneiform texts and 
Babylonian imagery. As a matter of fact, there is next to no trace of any Greek influence 
on these planispheres representing what the Greeks and Romans themselves called the 
Sphaera Barbarica. 

‘For example: what Dr. Chatley calls “the jackal on hoe” is the Babylonian constella- 
tion of the “plough” (Sumerian ^'^^APIN, Accadian epinmr), one star of which is, 
curiously enough, called ^^^“"UR-BAR-RA = “the wolf”, because the seed- 

drill, attached to the Babylonian plough — possibly because it seems to devour and 
“wolf down” the seed — is called ahu “the wolf”. It is not by any means, as Dr. 
Chatley supposes, Ursa minor — the lines do not fit the configuration of its stars — but 

Cassiopeia, * , e being “the Wolf” star. 

‘The “Bull’s Leg” {hps) — which the Egyptians originally called mshtyw “the 

adze” — comes from the Gilgamesh epic where one of the heroes tears off the imittu, i.e. 
“the right hand”, of the heavenly Bull (Taurus) and throws it before Ishtar who wails 
over it. The wailing Ishtar is the figure of Nut standing with raised hands before the 
Bull’s Leg on the Assiut sarcophagus (Gundel, op. cit., pis. i and 2, fig. b). The Graeco- 
Egyptian magical papyrus of Paris 11 . 1285, 1301, 1307 calls her Ow^omd-q Thozopiti = 
tst-pty the “Wailing woman (or ‘raiser’?) of the (two) Heavens”. The 

head of the Bull is encased in gold and blue-stone by Gilgamesh’s order and hung up 
for the god Lugal-banadda. Hence the “Bull’s head” beside the “Bull’s Leg” on the 
planisphere of Athens (Gundel, op. cit., pi. 13) and the “Bull’s head” over tht hps in the 



Senmut tomb, Ramesseum, &c. The “Foreleg” constellation was quite familiar to the 
Hebrews. The Kesil of Job ix, 9 is, of course, the same word as *703 vocalized 
by the Massoretes in Lev. iii, 4. 10. 15; iv, 9; vii, 4; Ps. xxxviii, 8; Job xv, 27; 
Sirach xlvii, 19, translated “loin” in AV and ipoia in the LXX; Babylonian kaslu Kujun- 
jik 8614; Holma, Korperteile, 62; cf. kuzallu (read ku-sal-lu) “big-loined”. D'’*7DD in 
Isa. xiii, 10, wrongly vocalized as a plural kesiltm by the Massoretes and mistranslated 
“constellations” in AV, is obviously a dual keslayim “the two Forelegs” and refers to 
Ursa maior and Ursa minor both having the characteristic shape of a hpL The 
author of the “Blessings of Jacob” — a poem comparing the twelve tribes of Israel to 
the twelve signs of the zodiac — knew the astromythical explanation of these two 
constellations, for he says of the Twins Shimefon and Levi “in their arrogance they 
mutilated shor” = Taurus, cp. Zimmern, ZA vii, 162. 

‘It is probable that the Hebrews got the “Foreleg” constellation from Egypt, since 
no constellation of this name is found in the Babylonian star-lists we know, and since 
kesil is coupled in Job ix, 9 with the hitherto unexplained constellation 'ash 
in Job xxxviii, 32 trs. and read lE?y) which is evidently No. V sb^w rsiw “the 
many stars” in the Theban list of hour-stars : Brugsch, Thes. i, 188 a star-cluster : Coma 
Berenices. The Babylonians write ^''^^MUL-MUL = star-star for the Pleiades. 

‘The Greeks represent the Bull as a m^re protome, “forepart”, evidently supposing 
that the two hind-legs were wrenched off. Both the “Foreleg of the Bull”, the “Bucra- 
nium”, and the “Wailing goddess” standing between the two Lions — Leo and Leaina on 
Proctor’s map, neshu and neshtu “Lion” and “Lioness” on the cuneiform uranographic 
tablet found in Assur and published by Weidner, Archiv f. Orientforschung, iv, 73 ff. — 
is shown on an early Greek ( ?) vase-painting found in Boeotia (Wolters, Eph. arch., 1892, 
221, pi. 10, i). Both these lions are seen on the Denderah circular planisphere. 

‘Dr. Chatley has overlooked the far-reaching discovery of Prof. P. V. Neugebauer 
{Vierteljahrschrift d. Astronomischen Gesellschaft, Lxix, 76, review of G. Martiny’s book) 
that the planisphere of Denderah is oriented in such a way that the shorter axis of the 
temple runs through -q Ursae Maioris and Spica, that is through the great circle used 
for the orientation (on New Year’s morning before sunrise) of all Assyrian temples. 
This being the case, and the close affinity of the figures of Sagittarius, Capricornus, and 
Aquarius in Denderah with their Babylonian counterparts being known since Hinke’s 
publication on the Babylonian boundary-stones (pp. 98-102, fig. 32-5), it was legiti- 
mate to search further in that direction. 

‘This has been done with complete success and far-reaching results. But I wish to add 
one more example to show how impossible it is for the astronomer to succeed by guess- 
work where only philology and archaeology combined can succeed : 

‘The ^ 2 ^ Ht nwt “womb of heaven” (Brugsch hit mw “uterus aquarum”), 
identified by Pogo with the Pleiades — Dr. Chatley seeing quite well that the rectascen- 
sional distance from Sirius excludes this possibility — is represented in the Senmut 

tomb as a characteristic almond-shaped configuration 

see Gundel, op. cit.. 



pi. 3, fig. a. This figure survives in King Alfonso el Sabio’s Libros del Saber, l, 116 for 
Corona australis — and that is what it is, of course. 

‘On the ceiling of the tomb of Sethos I in Thebes (Gundel, op. cit., pi. 5, fig. b) the 
constellation is shown clearly as a wreath {corona) with the fourteen stars of it catalogued 
by Hipparchus and the clasp closing the corona known as gemma in the parallel figure 
used for Corona borealis. 

‘This identification yields, of course, another very welcome fixed point in the 
decan-series besides Orion and Sirius. The Srkt (Hugo Winckler = Arabic Suleiqah) or 
Scorpion-goddess is the goddess Isharra in Scorpio. The Fishes {hanni) identified 
p. 124 for unknown reasons with Scorpio are Pisces and nothing else. The Bell-wether 
■^^^LU-LIM of the Babylonians (our Andromeda) is the Ram {apw) and the ship in the 
Senmut tomb is our Argo (Plutarch, de Iside, c. 22). 

‘The “Giant” nht of the Theban “hour-stars” list is “the Giant” = = 

“ ’^’^’’rabu” identified by Father Kugler with the Aquarius of the Babylonians; the pi 
sbi we “that single star” the “the single star” = /x Herculis of the Babylonians 

(Kugler, Sternkunde, Erg. ii, 186, No. VI). 

‘Neither the hour-stars nor the decans are confined to an “equatorial” belt 60° broad. 
The Babylonian so-called astrolabes or lists of thirty-six decan-stars — three for each 
month — show that they belong to all three “roads” or “wheels” (harran means both) of 
the sky, to the harran '^En-lil or northern cap, to the harran '^Anu i6|^° north and south 
of the Equator, and to the harran ’’E-A, the southern “oceanic belt”, e.g. Corona 

Dr. Chatley replies as follows : 

‘Dr. Eisler’s interesting letter calls for a few remarks : 

‘(i) My reference to the “obviously Greek” elements in the Denderah planisphere 
related to the zodiac and planets and did not exclude an ultimate Babylonian origin for 
the zodiac. 

‘(2) The “jackal on hoe” which appears on the Denderah ceiling is too near the pole 
to be satisfactorily identified with Cassiopeia. 

‘(3) The relation of the Gilgamesh legend to the Pyramid and Coffin texts is new to 
me and I do not feel competent to discuss it. 

‘(4) Ursa minor has not previously been identified with a second ox-leg. 

‘(5) Professor P. V. Neugebauer’s orientation suggestion had not come to my notice, 
but it needs further study, since it does not agree with the orientation actually referred 
to in the inscriptions in the Denderah temple itself. Since the almost complete failure 
of Lockyer’s Dawn of Astronomy to provide any results consistent with archaeology the 
subject of orientation has been suspect. One of the objections is that if no date is fixed 
beforehand there is a wide choice of stellar risings to which any orientation can be 

‘(6) The positions of Corona Australis, Scorpio, Pisces, and Aries are all inconsistent 
with Dr. Eisler’s identifications. In this connexion I would mention Petrie’s new book 
The Wisdom of the Egyptians (1940), which I had not seen when my article was sent in. 



Broadly speaking, Petrie arrives at the same results as myself, although there are some 
important differences in detail. 

‘(7) The Babylonian “decans” have been discredited in most recent writings on the 
matter, the suggestion being that there were three stars in the three belts each month 
and not, as with the true Egyptian decans, one star (or star group) every ten days. It is 
a fact that Diodorus Siculus speaks of the Babylonian stars in the latter way but this 
may have been a confusion with Egyptian ideas. 

‘As to the width of the belt, some of the hour constellations probably went outside 
the sixty degrees, but I fail to see why the index stars should do so. Petrie puts the 
decans flatly on the ecliptic and the major part of the horary groups on the equator. 
H. O. Lange and O. Neugebauer {Papyrus Carlsberg No. i, Copenhagen, 1940) identify 
Nut with the decanal ecliptic band.’ 




The following Bibliography, covering the years 1939 and 1940, continues that for 1937 and 1938 published 
in this Journal, xxv, 89-93. The restriction of communications due to the war precludes access to the 
continental publications of the latter part of 1939 and the whole of 1940, and I am well aware of the incom- 
pleteness of the present survey. Nevertheless, in view of the importance of the materials here noticed and 
the advisability of maintaining, so far as is possible, the periodic appearance of this Bibliography, I grate- 
fully accept the Editor’s offer to publish it despite its inevitable imperfections. 

R. Flaceliere and J. and L. Robert give a brief summary of recent work on the Greek inscriptions of 
Egypt in their admirable ‘Bulletin Epigraphique’ {Rev. et. gr. lii, 531-5). 

The death of C. C. Edgar on IMay 10, 1938, removed one who had rendered valuable serv ice to epi- 
graphical as well as to papyrological studies; see the obituary appreciations by H. I. Bell in JEA xxiv, 
133-4, t>y O. Guervud in Ann. Serv. xxxix, 3-10. 

F. Bilabel has issued a further instalment of the invaluable Sammelhuch griechischer Urkiinden aus 
Aegypten (v, 2, Heidelberg, 1938), which he has continued since the death of its founder, F. Preisigke; the 
new fascicule comprises 592 documents, of which 288 are inscriptions. To J. Zingerle we owe {Jahreshefte, 
xxx, Beiblatty 164-5) corrections of a number of proper names appearing in inscriptions included in earlier 
volumes of this work (Nos. 1684, 1780, 1808, 1839, 4046, 4272, 5858, 5860); most of these are examined 
and rejected by L. Robert {Etudes epigraphiques et philologiques, 248 ff. ; cf. Rev, et. gr. lii, 532-4, Nos. 
541-2, 548, 552-4). 

Inscriptions contribute to the materials of the important work of W. Otto and H. Bengtson on the 
decline of the Ptolemaic Empire {Ziir Geschichte des Niederganges des Ptolernderr etches, Abh. Munchen, 
XVII ; cf. W. W. Tkr'^,JHS lix, 323-4, C. B. Welles, Cl. Weekly, xxxiii, 279-81, J. and L. Robert, Rev. et. 
gr. 530-1, Nos. 529, 531, 535), and also, though not largely, to W. Peremans’s study of the position of 
foreigners and natives in Egypt during the third century b.c., the relations of the various ethnic groups to 
each other and to the government, and the government’s attitude to immigrants {Vreemdelingen en Egypte^ 
naren in Vroeg-Ptolemaeisch Egypte, Louvain, 1937 ; French resume, 266-89 : cf. the same author’s summary 
in Ex Oriente Lux, iv, 183-6), which has been reviewed by various experts in Aeg. xix, 116-17, Museum, 
XLVi, 178-81, Gnomon, xv, 242-8, ZSav. lix, 606-12, Uantiquite classique, vn, 430-2, xxxii, 109-11, 
CL Weekly, xxxiii, 295-7. Similarly U. Wilcken’s account of the royal cult of the Ptolemies {Sit:^ungsb. 
Berlin, 1938, 308-17) is based in part upon epigraphical materials. 

By an unfortunate oversight I omitted to mention in an earlier bibliography the important role played by 
inscriptions in the thorough examination of the economic life of Roman Egypt by A. C. Johnson, which 
forms the second volume of Tenny Fr\nk’s Economic Survey of Ancient Rome (Baltimore, 1936); of the 
445 documents there translated, 16 are epigraphical, including the edicts of Capito, Lusius Geta, and 
Tiberius Julius Alexander (Nos. 369, 392, 440; the remainder are Nos. i, 2, 62, 136-7, 139, 235, 247, 253, 
278, 345, 390, 403). Among the documents selected by M. P. Charlesworth to illustrate the reigns of 
Claudius and Nero are a dedication from Tentyra, dated April 3, a.d. 42 {OGIS 663 = IGR i, 1165), 
an inscription of Ptolemais — either the famous city of that name or Ptoiemais Euergetis in the Fayyum — 
erected in honour of Nero in a.d. 60 or 61 {Documents illustrating the Reigns of Claudius and Xero, Cambridge 
U.P., 1939, 26, No. 35, 41, No. 18). 

In a chapter on ‘Musicians, athletes and acrobats in the astrological writings’ L. Robert discusses 
F. Cumont’s recent work U Egypte des astrologues and in particular restores in the relevant texts some 

* For reasons that need no elaboration the papyrological portion of this Bibliography has had to be post- 
poned until after the war. — Ed. 



technical terms relating to athletes or musicians, on the basis, in part, of the available epigraphical evi- 
dence {Etudes epigraphigues et philologiques, 76-108). F. Zucker traces the Germans found in Roman and 
Byzantine Egypt {Geistige Arbeit , vi, 13, 3-6), and H. Kortenbeutel deals with the same theme in an article 
mentioned below. L. Bringmann’s thesis Die Frau im ptolemdisch-kaiserlichen Aegypten (Bonn, 1939) I 
have not seen. The documents discussed in M, N. Tod’s article on the scorpion in Graeco- Roman Egypt 
{JEA XXV, 55-61) include stelae from Acoris (Tihna) and Abydos, the latter now in Berlin, commemorating 
a man and a woman killed by scorpion-stings. The posthumous work of P. Graindor on the terra-cottas 
of Graeco-Roman Eg}"pt {Terres cuites de VJSgypte greco-romaine, Antwerp, 1939) contains a general dis- 
cussion of the signatures and other legends found on terra-cottas, especially frequent in Egypt (pp. 19-27), 
and publishes four inscribed objects (pp. 154, 168, 170, i8i). 

In an article dealing with the three iTravopOojral known to us from Egypt {Aeg, xviii, 234-43) A. Stein 
discusses especially Claudius Firmus, whose name is found in an inscription of Alexandria (OG/*S 71 1 , Breccia, 
Iscr. greche e latine, 93). A. voN Premerstein’s full and learned edition of a new papyrus-fragment, now in the 
Giessen University Library, of the so-called ^Alexandrian Acts of the Martyrs’ contains chapters on the 
Alexandrian citizen assembly of the 180,000 and on the Alexandrian yepov(jia{pp. 42 ff., 57 ff.), the material of 
which is partly derived from epigraphical someth {Alexandrinische Geronten vor Kaiser Gaius, Giessen, 1939; 
cf.i?^z?.^7.^r.Ln, 531, No. 536). C. E.Visser’s work on Alexandrian gods and cults (cf. JEyi xxv, 90) has been 
reviewed in Uantiquite classique, vn, 429-30, Cl. Weekly, xxxii, 1 13-14, TheoL LZ LXiv, 6, Rev. et. anc. XL, 
337"9> D^ev. hist.rel. cxix, 93-5, and^w. Journ. Phil. LXi, 1 19-21, and the same authoress has published a brief 
discussion of the Alexandrian citizen-names in Ex Oriente Lux, iv, 186-9. Kolbe has re-examined the 
inscription {OGIS 36) painted on a cinerary urn found in a cemetery to the east of Alexandria, and maintains 
that this proves that the Soteria founded at Delphi by the Aetolians was a penteteric festival and occurred in 
Olympian, not in Pythian years {Hermes, Lxxv, 57-8). O. Gueraud devotes a long discussion to the four-sided 
‘Monument of Agrios’, of which the upper part, reputed to have been found at Alexandria, has long been in 
the Cairo Museum (Alilne, Catalogue, 9267), and the lower has recently been unearthed at Akhmim ; a second 
monument of the same Agrios of Panopolis has come to light at Abu Tig in Upper Egypt. After investigating 
the history and significance of the memorial and the character of its dedicator, Gueraud goes on to establish 
the text of its inscriptions with an ample commentary {Ann. Serv. xxxix, 279-303, 784). 

In 1. 34 of the honorary decree of the yeovyoi (cf. JEA xxv, 90), found at Kom Truga, G. Klaffenbach 
has corrected e??’ d/c/iTjv into ert aKpLrjv {Archiv, xiil, 213 ; cf. Rev. it. gr. Lll, 532-3). Two metrical inscrip- 
tions of Hermupolis Magna {SEG viii, 473-4) have evoked from C. Picard comments on the symbolism 
of the shell and the seasons in relation to the funerary cult {Rev. arch, xiv, 79-82), and R. Goossens claims 
that burial-rites in Buenos Aires and in Madagascar throw light on the ‘second burial’ mentioned in another 
epitaph {SEG viii, 621) from the same site {Chron. d'£g. xv, 152-3 ; cf. Rev. it. gr. lii, 533-4). L. Robert 
comments {Rev. de phil. xiii, 179-80) on some of the personal names which occur in the long list of mer- 
cenaries forming the garrison of that city in 78 B.c. {Abh. Berlin, 1937, 6; cf, Aeg. xviii, 279-84, JEA xxv, 
91, Studia et documenta, v, 600). A. Wilhelm discusses {Wien. Stud, lvi, 58-9) the text and metre of two 
grave-epigrams {SEG i, 570-1) from the Jewish community at Leontopolis (Tell el-Yehudiyah). 

]\I. Raphael publishes the few surviving words of the Greek text of a bilingual decree, probably dating 
from the reign of Ptolemy IV Philopator, found at Cairo and now preserved in the Egyptian IVIuseum 
there, the object of which was to increase the religious honours of the King and his predecessors {Mim, 
Inst. fr. Lxvi, 509—12). A. Wilhelm retains {Wien. Stud, lvi, 87), despite hiatus and asyndeton, rovSe iyw 
in 1. 9 of a metrical epitaph of the third or fourth century a.d. {SB 4229) from Sa^arah, preserved first at 
Cairo (Milne, Catalogue, 9222) and subsequently at Alexandria (Breccia, Iscr. greche e latine, 319). 

A. Vogliano’s second report on the Italian excavations at Medinet Madi contains five Greek votive 
inscriptions (one of which bears the unerased name of Domitian, another dedicates a statue to Hermuthis 
and Anubis, and in a third a rexTiTT/s dedicates his handiwork to Isis), two graffiti, and a dipinto {Secondo 
rapporto degli scavi . . . di Madlnet Madi, Milan, 1937, 44-51). G. Farina comments on the name and 
position of Isidorus, the author of the four now famous hymns {SEG viil, 548-51), claiming him, on the 
strength of the Greek transcriptions of three Egyptian terms, ^Epixovdig, Qiovi, and PIoppapLdvpT^s, as a 
native of Alexandria or its neighbourhood {Riv. Stud. Orient, xvii, 279-82), Wilhelm examines a passage 
in one of these hymns (549, 1. 8), proposing to read raxecoa? instead of raxecasr and adducing many 


epigraphical parallels for the synizesis of crot ev^dfievoL and for the occurrence of a spondee in the second 
half of a pentameter verse {Wien. Stud, lvi, 69-70). Elsewhere Vogliano inserts in a preliminary report 
on the fifth campaign on that site an inscription {Ann. Serv. xxxix, 692) on a limestone block brought 
from Crocodilopolis (Kiman Paris) to Medinet el- Fay yum, bearing an ex-voto of 245-221 b.c., in which 
OL Iv KpoK[o]SiXa)v TToXeL 7 oi>S[ar]ot dedicate their synagogue 7 Tpoa€vx'j[p]) for Ptolemy Euergetes I, 
Berenice II, and their children; this dedication he discusses more fully in Riv. di fil. lxvii, 247-51 (cf. 
CL Weekly, xxxiii, 251), calling attention to its resemblance to OGIS 726 and Breccia, Iscr. greche e latine, 
II, and commenting upon the early Jewish settlers in Egypt. F. M. Heichelheim publishes {Etudes dediees 
a la memoire d' Andre Andreades, 1939) a stone, now in the collection of E. N. Adler in London, found at 
Euhemeria (Kasr el-Banat) and purchased at Medinet el-Fayyum, dated April 18, 69 B.c. and marking a 
ToVos* avvoSov yecopywv ISlcdv, Tachter zur besonderen Verwendung des Konigs’, Ptolemy XIII Neos 
Dionysos. G. Patriarca includes in his sur\xy of Greek inscriptions relating to the Roman world a dedica- 
tion to Apollo from Kom el-A^ar {SEG vili, 608), now in the Cairo Museum {Bull. Mus. Imp. Rom. 

VI, 135)- 

The above-mentioned work of Otto and Bengtson on the decline of the Ptolemaic Empire opens with 
a discussion and restoration of a Greek votive inscription of 110-9 B.c. found at Coptos {Abh. Munchen, 
XVII, 1-22; cf. Rev. et. gr. Lil, 534, No. 551), and P. Jouguet gives provisional copies of inscriptions on 
four statue-bases discovered at Karnak {Ann. Serv. xxxix, 603-5), of which are in honour of Augustus, 
Kaiaapa AvroKpdropa 9eov vtov Ala ^EXcvdepLov Sepaarov, and one of Titus, 9eov OvecnraaLavov vlov 9e6v 
Tirov. G. DE Jerphanion discusses {La voix des monuments, Rome, 1938, 95 IF.) the text of Athanasius* 
letter irpos rou? povd^ovras in the light of the literary tradition, both Greek and Latin, and of the very 
imperfect epigraphical copy preserved at Thebes {GIG 8607, Evelyn White and Crum, The Monastery of 
Epiphanius at Thebes, ii, 124, 306-7). A. Bataille examines and corrects {Bull. xxxviii, 129-39) 
a graffito from the Mons Thebanus first published by P. Jouguet {Melanges Glotz, ii, 493-500), and himself 
edits 71 scratched graffiti from the same place, between the Valley of the Queens and Der el-Bahri, of which 
Nos. 6, 10, 14, 15, and 37 are the most interesting {ibid. 141-79), as well as a fragmentary stela from the 
funerary chapel of Hatshepsut bearing a dedication of the first or second century a.d., probably to Amenothes, 
Imouthes, Asclepius, and Hygiea {Ann. Serv. xxxviii, 63-7). 

H. Kortenbeutel’s article on the Germans in Egypt {Mitt, deutsch. Inst. Kairo, viii, 177-84) cites only 
one epigraphical reference, an epitaph from Apollonopolis Magna (Edfu) contained in Lefebvre, Recueil 
des inscr. grecques-chret. d'Egypte, 559. M. Segre skilfully restores a mutilated text on a block of granite 
brought from Syene (Aswan) to Cairo and thence to the Alexandria Museum, interprets it as a petition, 
probably of 149-8 b.c., presented by temple priests relative to the renewal of privileges granted to a sanctuary 
of the god Mandulis either at Philae or at Elephantine, and points out its interest for the relations between 
Egypt and the Ethiopians to the south {Bull. Soc. arch. d'Alex. x, 325-32). 

Of outstanding importance is the publication, based on a MS. of H. G. Evelyn White and revised by 
J. H. Oliver, of the 42 Greek inscriptions copied by the former scholar, who died in 1924, at the great 
temple in the Oasis of El-Khargah {The Temple of Hibis in el Khdrgeh Oasis, ii, New York, 1939; cf. Rev. 
et. gr. Lll, 534-5). On the gateways are engraved the edicts of Cn. Vergilius Capito, a.d. 48 {OGIS 665, 
SEG via, 794), and Tiberius Julius Alexander, a.d. 68 {OGIS 669, SEG vili, 793), already well known, 
and the epigram of Hermeas {SEG Yin, 795): to these are added the edict of L. Julius Vestinus, a.d. 60, 
a second text of that of Alexander, and a new epigram of Hermeas. From other parts of the temple come 
36 miscellaneous inscriptions, mostly graffiti and dipinti, of which nineteen are here published for the 
first time, including an inscription of Ptolemy II (No. 7), dating from 283 to 245 B.c. Oliver has added a 
useful concordance, and the texts are illustrated by thirteen photographic plates. The edict of Alexander 
is also used by W. Schubart in his essay on ‘Das Gesetz und der Kaiser in griechischen Urkunden’ {Klio, 
XXX, 60, 69), and is fully discussed in A. C. Johnson’s work mentioned above. A. Ro\ye devotes an article 
{Ann. Serv. xxxviii, 157-95) to the sarcophagus and a libation-table of Potasimto (Pedi-sma-tawy) and a 
statuette of Amasis (Ie<h-mes), now in the Egyptian Museum at Cairo, using their inscriptions to throw 
light upon the careers and titles of these two generals who took part in the Nubian expedition of Psamtek II 
the Psammis of Herodotus, as is recorded in the Abu Simbel graffito {SIG 1, Tod, GHI 4). 

H. Junker offers a new and greatly improved interpretation {Zts.f. neutest. Wissenschaft, xxxvii, 281-5) 



of a puzzling text from Djebel Barkal, first published in Harvard African Studies^ i, 197-8, and H. Korten- 
BEUTEL publishes {Zts. f. neatest. Wissenschaft, xxxvii, 61-4) another Nubian text of uncertain provenance 
(it was acquired by F. Zucker at Luxor in 1910), dating from a.d. 1157 ; it is now in the Egyptian Depart- 
ment of the Staatliche IVIuseen in Berlin. Of another sandstone stela in the same Museum, originating 
from Abydos, M. N. Tod gives a revised edition 'mJEA xxv, 56-8 (cf. L. Robert, Etudes epigraphiques et 
philologiques^ 87, note 3). A. Wilhelm proposes {Gott. Xachr. in, 143-5) re2id av^oiJL€(^v') yeverj in 1 . 10 
of an interesting grave-epigram from Egypt, now in Gottingen (cf. P. Jacobsthal, Hermes., xlvi, 318-20), 
and gives epigraphical examples of the substitution of a trochee for a dactyl in the first foot of the second 
half of a pentameter. Of an inscription from Euhemeria, now in the collection of E. N. x\dler in London, 
something has already been said, and four stamped amphora-handles, acquired in Egypt and now housed 
in the Museum of the American x\cademy at Rome, are published by C. P. Ludlum in Mem. Am. Acad. 
XV, 19. L. Robert has shown {Rev. de pJiil. xin, 183-4; 532, No. 540) that a small 

altar inscribed o xP^(rfJLoX6[yos:] Bpvajv Ad AappavvSw, which was claimed by J. Schaefer as indicating a cult 
of that deity in Egypt, was found at Alylasa and was later transported thence to Egypt. 

Publishing a Samian inscription of the third century B.c., consisting of a list of fifteen names and ethnics, 
of which the last is ApipicLviog ^appaLOlrr^g, L. ROBERT claims {Etudes epigraphiques et philologiqiies, 113-18) 
that it gives us an interesting aper9u of the composition of the Lagid garrison in Samos; he collects and 
discusses the inscriptions which attest the relations of the island with the Ptolemies, calls attention to a 
slab found at Samos bearing an Egyptizing relief and a bilingual dedication in Greek and Demotic, and 
recognizes in an inscribed fragment found at the Heraeum a list of the Egyptian months. 



The Use of Red for Amounts of Cereals in Hieratic 

In connexion with Dr. Gardiner's remarks, pp. 26-7 above, on the use of red ink for entries of 
amounts of spelt {bote) in New Kingdom papyri, I give examples of this method of distinguishing 
cereals — mostly spelt, but sometimes also wheat {szvt) — from documents of earlier date. 

1. Hekanakhte Papyri (Metropolitan Museum, New York). No. 3, a letter, and No. 5, a sheet 
of accounts, both mention amounts of Lower Eg\^ptian barley and spelt. In No. 3 ‘spelt' is in red 
throughout, in No. 5 it is in black ; in both documents the amounts of spelt are in red throughout, and 
in both all references to L. E. barley (the only other cereal mentioned) are in black. No. 7, an account 
of spelt, uses black throughout; no other cereal being concerned, no distinction has to be made. 

2. A writing-board held by a scribe from a model granary, published Firth and Gunn, Teti Pyramid 
Cemeteries, 271-2, bears an account of L. E. barley, spelt, wheat, bh, zv^h, figs, and something 
the heading of which is illegible; ‘spelt' and its amounts are in red, everything else is in black. 

3. P. Harageh 2 (unpublished, cf, Engelbach and Gunn, Harageh, 33), Dyn. 12, has an account of 
Upper Egyptian barley, spelt, bL\ and wheat, in that order; the amounts of spelt and wheat are in 
red, evervthing else, including all headings, is in black. The colours alternate, perhaps by intention. 

4. P. Berl. 66ig (ZAS xxxviii, 140), verso, a mathematical problem, twice mentions ‘U. E. 
barley’, with its amounts, in black, and twice ‘spelt’ in black but its amounts in red. No other 
cereal is mentioned. 

5. P. Buldk 18 (Mariette, Pap. de Boulaq, ii, pis. 14 ff.; ZAS Lvii, pis. i** ff.). The ‘larger 
manuscript' mentions cereals only in the account pi. 29, B, 9 ff., where bh, dates, wheat, and spelt 
are entered. The amounts of wheat are in red, everything else, including spelt, being in black. 
In several places (pis. 15, 25, 30, 35, 44) the numbers of cakes or loaves {bnt, p(t, prsn, hrt) are 
given in red as well as in black, and it may be that, as Scharff suggests {ZAS lvii, 56) the difference 
of colour represents a difference in the cereal used. The ‘smaller manuscript’ gives an amount of 
spelt (pi. 49, middle, 12), and one of wheat-flour (pi. 51, middle, ult.) in red. 

6. P. math. Rhind. In the accounts (‘No. 86') on a piece of papyrus used to repair the volume, 
spelt, with amounts, occurs 8 times, all in red, L. E. barley (the only other cereal mentioned), 
with amounts, at least 3 times, all in black. The papyrus itself uses only black for cereals (references 
ed. Feet, 114) and their amounts. 

7. Kahiin Papyri. These mention cereals with amounts in the accounts (pis. 15, 18, 19, 20, 26, 
26a) and letters (pis. 27, 30, 36). Ml are in black (including spelt, pis. 26, 56; 30; 41) except the 
numbers, in red, of hekats under a heading which is lost, pi. 26, 56 ff. In pi. 26^, 17 a number 
‘30’ of prsn cakes is given in red ; cf. the remark under No. 5 above. 

Battiscombe Gunn 

The Writing of Htp-Di-Nsxv 

P. C. Smither has attempted to prove {JEA xxv, 34 ff.) that the spelling ^ ^ ^ with ^ as the second 
sign does not occur in horizontal inscriptions before the Fourteenth Dynasty. An exception is 
Gardiner & Feet, Inset, of Sinai, pi. ii, no. 24, from the reign of Ammenemes III. From 
° 1 

the same reign comes writing is half horizontal, 

half vertical. This new evidence lends support to the opinion that the material quoted by Smither 
is hardly sufficient to warrant the conclusions drawn. C. J. C. Bennett 



Egyptian Sea-going Ships : a Correction 

In my remarks on the subject of the hull-construction of Egyptian sea-going ships on p. 4 of the last 
volume of this Journal, I quoted the Twelfth Dynasty royal barge at Chicago as an example of the 
technique there described. This was an error induced by a misunderstanding of a photograph; the 
barge in question was built by the method customary with most riverine boats in Ancient Egypt, i.e. 
by mortising m.any small pieces of wood together, see Clarke and Engelbach, Ancient Egyptian 
Masonry, fig. 35. While thus acknowledging my mistake, how'ever, I find it incredible that such a 
flimsy mode of construction could have been used for sea-going vessels often over 100 feet long and 
carrying cargo, and although I cannot now quote chapter and verse for my view, I am still of opinion 
that some such method of building as that postulated in my article must have been used. The long 
timbers necessary for planking a hull of that type would doubtless have been imported from the 
Lebanon, whence Snofru obtained the timber for the great ships whose building is recorded on the 
Palermo Stone, and whence Wenamun sought the materials for the sacred bark of Amun. 

As regards the fastenings of such hulls, I had assumed that they were wooden pins, though this 
point was not raised in my article. Professor Newberry, however, has pointed out that down to 
comparatively recent times vessels engaged in the Red Sea trade were not pinned but sewn, owing to 
the numerous reefs which might be encountered, and he questions whether this method of fastening 
may not go back to Ancient Egyptian times. While there does not seem to be any direct evidence 
bearing on this matter, the method of fastening deck to hull by lacings current in the Old Kingdom 
certainly raises the possibility that the planking of the hull might have been sewn in a similar manner, 
though whether this held good of the ships of the later period it is impossible to say. 

R. O. Faulkner 

The Cow’s Belly 

To the Arab geographers the apex of the Delta, some 23 km. north of Cairo, was familiar under the 
name Ja. Batn el-Bakarah, ‘The Cow’s Belly’, and Maspero, Histoire Ancienne, i, 6, n. 2, quotes 
from Ampere, Voyage en J^gypte et en Nithie, p. 120: ‘Ce nom, donne a I’endroit ou commence la 
partie la plus fertile de I’figypte, n’est-il pas un souvenir de la vache divine, d’Isis, symbole de 
fecondite et personnification de I’figypte?’ It is at least interesting to note that the comparison of 
the Nile Valley with the belly of a bovine animal goes back as far as Ramesside times. In the Story 
of the Blinding of Truth edited by me from a papyrus presented by Mr. Chester Beatty to the 
British Museum, the hero, who is none other than Horus, son of Osiris, under a thin disguise, refuses 
to accept any substitute for the ox filched from him by Falsehood, i,e, by the wicked god Seth. In 
making this refusal he says : Ts there any ox as large as my own ox ? If it should stand in Payeamun,^ 
the tuft of its tail would rest upon Pdjowf (‘the Papyrus-reeds’), its one horn being on the mountain 
of the west, and its other one on the mountain of the east, and the Great River as its place of repose.’ 
I leave it to others to elaborate or to reject this suggestion. Alan H. Gardiner 

The Tall Story of the Bull 

Dr. Gardiner having kindly sent me a proof of the above Brief Communication, it occurred to me 
that this w^as a good opportunity for drawing attention to a passage in Plutarch’s Life of Lycurgus,^ 
wEich affords a striking parallel to the episode of the bull in the Story of the Blinding of Truth. 
The story as told by Plutarch runs as follow^s : 

And a saying is reported of one Geradas, a Spartan of very ancient type, who, on being asked by a stranger 
what the punishment for adulterers was among them, answered : ‘Stranger, there is no adulterer among us.’ 
‘Suppose, then,’ replied the stranger, ‘there should be one.’ ‘A bull,’ said Geradas, ‘would be his forfeit, 

1 Diospolis parva in the extreme northern centre of the Delta, the modem Balamun. 

2 Life of Lycurgus, 15, sect. 10. I have used the Loeb translation, Plutarch’s Lives i, pp. 252-5. The same 
story in a corrupt form again in Plutarch’s Moralia, 228 B,c {Apophtheg, Lacon, Lyc, 20). 



a bull so large that it could stretch over Mount Taygetus and drink from the River Eurotas.’ Then the 
stranger was astonished and said : ‘But how could there be a bull so large ?' To which Geradas replied with 
a smile: ‘But how could there be an adulterer in Sparta?’ 

In the story of the Blinding of Truth the hero describes a similarly impossible bull (translation by 
Dr. Gardiner above) and the herdsman, like the stranger to Sparta, quite naturally, retorts: ‘Is there 
any ox as large as you have said ?’ The Son of Truth thereupon takes the herdsman and Falsehood 
before the Tribunal and answers them by saying, ‘And is there a knife as large as you have said?’ 
He then reveals that he is the Son of Truth and has come to avenge his father, condemned by the 
same tribunal because of the exaggerated claims made by Falsehood concerning the unique size of 
his knife. ^ The point of both stories lies in the tu qiioque, as much as to say, one ‘tall’ story is as 
good as another. In the Egyptian tale we are given a vivid impression of the size of the bull, but in 
Plutarch’s story this is not made so clear. We are not told, for example, where the bull is standing 
to enable it to stretch over Mount Taygetus. Is it not possible that in the story, as originally told, 
this bull stood in the River Eurotas with one horn stretching over {vtt^pkvtttoj) Mount Taygetus 
(and the other over Mount Pamon) ? 

If these two stories had a common origin, as seems likely, the question naturally arises. Did the 
original come from Egypt or Sparta ? My own feeling is that the bull story is more at home in the 
Egyptian tale. One thing is certain, it demonstrates again that the peoples of the Ancient World, 
differ as they did in race and language, had many things in common in outlook and ideas. 

Paul C. Smither 

The Name of Sesebi 

In his Preliminary Report on the Excavations at Sesebi {Sudla) and Amor ah West^ Anglo-Egyptian 
Sudan^ igyy-gS [JEA. xxiv, 151) Mr. H. W. Fairman discusses the origin of the name Sesebi, 
and mentions its use by Lepsius. I do not know, however, whether the following quotation from 
p. 265 of Lepsius’s Discoveries in Egypt, Ethiopia and the Peninsula of Sinai, 2nd edn., London, 1853, 
has met Mr. Fairman ’s eye: ‘We arrived on the 4th of July at Sese, a mountain on which is the 
remains of a fortress. Our servant Ahmed (from Derr), informed us that after the death of every 
king, his successor was led to the top of the mountain, and decked with a peculiar royal head- 
dress. . . . The ruins, lying about a quarter of an hour to the south of Mount Sese, are called Sesebi. 
Here stood an old temple. . . .’ 

The name Sesebi is certainly looked on by the natives to-day as a foreign corruption of the 
name Sesi. As a personal name Sesi is known in the Sudan, and it is possible that it has therefore 
replaced an earlier form Sesibi or Sesiba, which may have been preserved for posterity by Lepsius. 
But what the origin of the name is and the reason for it have not yet been discovered. It is probable 
that it is to be found in the Nubian language. For instance, the northern end of Sai Island is known 
as Sai-sab, ‘the head of Sai’. I am not suggesting that there is any connexion between the names 
Sai-sab and Sesebi. If Lepsius is right, Sesebi may mean ‘old (ruined) Sesi’: compare bai = ‘kill’, 
bobai = a disused village site (N. Darfur). On the other hand sibe ‘mud’, and sobe ‘wall’ may 
equally well for local reasons be thought to have contributed to the formation of the name. 

A. J. Arkell 

Big Game Hunters in Ptolemaic and Roman Libya 
In 1899 A. Conze and C. Schuchhardt published {Ath, Mitt, xxiv, 203 f., No. 8), without commen- 
tary, an epigram engraved on a block of white marble discovered in an old cemetery south-east of 

I Parallels to other parts of the Story of the Blinding of T ruth from modem Greek folk-stories have been 
given by Pieper in ZAS LXX, 92 ff., and some European and Asiatic examples by J. Bolte in Zeitschrift fur 
Volkskunde, 1931, Band III, Heft 2, pp. 172-3. 



Klissekeui Skala, in the neighbourhood of Pergamum. Its opening couplet reads, in their version, 

Ov fiev 6ripr]Trjp y€v6pL7]v AIBY - - lSos dyprq^, 

7 TOV yap pot drjpcov dvrtov iXOepevat; 

In Oesterr. Jahresh, xxiii, Beiblatt, 409 f., No. 10, J. Zingerle commented thus: 'Mit Verbesserung 
von A zu A gewiss Anspielung auf die berufsmassigen Jager, die in Afrika und 

sonstwo die Grosstiere fiir die Tierhetzen und fiir die kaiserlichen Menagerien zusammenfingen/ 
This restoration was duly registered in Suppl. Epigr, Graec. iv, 705. 

With Zingerle’s interpretation I am in full agreement; nevertheless, I hesitate to accept the con- 
jecture which he regards as certain. For it involves a serious metrical error, inasmuch as elsewhere 
the L of Atj 3 v 7 ] and its derivates is, to the best of my knowledge, invariably short. True, metrical 
inaccuracies are all too frequent in Greek epigrams;^ but I am unwilling to attribute so flagrant a 
mistake to one whose work is otherwise metrically flawless. I therefore suggest {zl/t^u[aT]t8os‘ or 
(A) ipv[r)T]LSo9 y which conforms with the requirements of metre. 

I admit that, unlike At^varts,^ this form does not occur elsewhere, even among the numerous 
variants recorded by Stephanus Byzantinus;^ but the very number of these alternatives indicates 
that the form selected was open to individual choice or invention, and it would have been strange 
if no one had invented a local adjective ending in -cctt^s*, -arts* (or “fjTt?), for which there are 

abundant analogies.*^ Possibly this form At^vart^ is that written by Hesychius in the entry which 
has come down to us as At^vaartSes' rtve^ rwv vup(f)cov ovro) KaXovvrat. The editors are agreed 
that the word as it stands is corrupt, and Meineke conjectured At^vartSes (Philol. xii, 633); or 
/It^ucTTtdSe?, both of which forms are attested by Stephanus Byzantinus. For these Libyan Nymphs 
see Hofer in Roscher’s Lexikon der gnech, u, roin, Mythologie ii, 2043, Herter in Pauly-Wissowa- 
Kroll XVII, 1566, SiippL Epigr. Grace, ix, 266, 275, &c. 

The hunting of wild beasts, notably elephants, in Africa is epigraphically attested by an inscrip- 
tion from Egypt dating from the late third century b.c., now preserved in the British Museum,^ 
which contains a dedication of zlAe^arSpo? Evvhaiov ^Opoavvevsy d crwaTrocrraAei? StdSo^o? XaptpopTcot 
Twi arpaTr]ycot em Orjpav rcov eAe^dvrcoi^ and a body of troops under its commandant {rjyepd)v)y 
and by two other votives, in almost identical terms, dedicated by AL^as TIvppov AKapvav, orparrjyo^ 
amaraXets em rrjv drjpav rojv iXe^dvrojv ro Sevrepov.^ The full commentaries of Hall and Ditten- 
berger render further discussion here unnecessary, but I may refer to the vivid picture of the 
insecurity of the Egyptian country-side painted in a recent work by F. Cumont (L^^gypte des 
astrologues, 59 ff.) and to C. Preaux’s account of the organization of the elephant-hunts under the 
Lagid monarchs [U Economic royale des Lagides, 34 ff., 201, 357);^ on the animals, many of them 
brought from Africa, used for the Roman vcnationes see L. Friedlander, Sittengeschichte Roms^ 
II, 77 ff. [Roman Life and Manners ii, 62 ff., iv, 181 ff.). 

Marcus N. Tod 

See especially the abundant examples cited and discussed by A. Wilhelm in a recent article, Wiener Studien 
LVI, 54 ff. (cf. Gott. Nachrichten lii, 138 ff.), and those collected by O. J. Todd in Cl. On. xxxiii, 163 ff. 

Apoll. Rhod. i\ , 1753 » Dionysius, Pertegesis, 614. {Geogr. Graeci Minor esy ed. Didot, ii, 143); Steph. Byz. 
(see following note). 

3 To iSviKOV Al^vs Ai^vaaa Al^v, Al^vkos Ai^vKijy Kal Al^votlov . . . jcal yU^vorlvov Kal Al^vgtIvos t<al Al^vgtLvt), «:al 
Ai^VGrids Kai Al^vgtIs^ Kat Ai^VGoaia 6.7:6 rov Al^vgog’ Kat KTririKov At^VGriKas TrAaKa?” AvK6<f>p(jov. 

^ Cf. Steph. Byz. S. VV. AGea, Mata, Kapva, AvKoa, MeGuoa, iUtSeta, Aa|ta, TlaveaSy TIigvt], Uitvt), &:c. 

5 Published by H. R. Hall {CL Rev. xii, 274 ff.) and subsequently re-edited by IM. L. Strack (Archiv I, 
205 ff., No. 18), Dittenberger (OG 7 S, 86), and F. H. Marshall {Greek Inscriptions in the B M 1064) 

6 (a) From Edfu: J. P. Mahaffy, BCH xviii, 148 f., No. 3; M. L. Strack, Dynastie der Ptolevuier, 237, 
No. 56; Michel, Recueil, 1236; Dittenberger, OGIS, 82. {b) In the Hermitage Museum, Leningrad: S. de 
Ricci, Rev. Epigr. i, 153, No. i ; SB, 7306. Lichas and Charimortus are mentioned in Strabo .xvi, 4, 15. 

’ Mr. G. A. Waimvright has called my attention to Rostovtzeff’s article on the organization of the elephant- 
hunts from the reign of Ptolemy Philadelnhus to that of Ptolemy Epiphanes, Archiv iv, 301 ff 


On Medinet Habu Ostracon 4038 

This demotic gardening agreement^ contains references to the coinage used during its own period 
in Egypt which are not only of importance for the date of the text but also shed light on the 
economic conditions of the Nile country during the later time of the Principate. B 32 provides 
for payment in gold, C 5 for payment in ‘gold-(pieces) ... of the infamous queen ‘‘Old Woman” 

C II f. in ‘refined bronze’. Parker suggests that the gold pieces in question were issued by the 
Palmyrene queen Zenobia near a.d. 271 ; but aurei of Zenobia have never been found, and it is not 
likely that they existed, because the queen seems to have tried to acknowledge the superiority of 
the main emperor as long as her own position was not questioned by him. The numismatic heritage 
of her short reign consists, therefore, of nothing else than rare billon tetradrachms of her Egyptian 
province and, perhaps, two types of antoniniani, both suspect and not sufficiently confirmed.- 

On the other hand, it is well known that Ptolemaic coins were in use in Egypt during the inflation 
of the Roman denarius and the deterioration in the weight of the aureus in the third century a.d.,^ 
the period of the new text according to its grammar and palaeographic appearance. Probably a 
hoard of Ptolemaic gold coins with portraits of Arsinoe Philadelphus, Berenice II, or Arsinoe 
Philopator-^ had come into the possession of Talamas, the owner of the garden land, so that she 
could promise payment in them. The honorary title 'Old Woman’ as well as the word ‘infamous’ 
would be suitable for an Egyptian queen from a defeated dynasty. The ‘refined bronze’ of our text 
is most likely the late billon tetradrachmon of the Eg}^ptian province, which consisted of bronze 
with a minute and negligible admixture of silver. 

F. M. FIeichelheim 

^ C/. R. A. Parker, JEA xxvi (1941), 84 f. 

^ H. Mattingly, E. A. Sydenham, & P. H. Webb, The Roman Imperial Coinage, v 2 (1933), 572, 584; 
J. G. Milne, Catalogue of Alexandrian Coins in the Ashmolcan Museum (1933), p. xxiv and No. 4353; Brit. 
Mus. Cat. Alexandria (1892), 31 1; G. Macdonald, Catalogue of Greek Coins in the Hunterian Collection, 
University of Glasgozv, iii (1905), 539 ff. 

3 Cf. F. Preisigke & E. Kiessling, Worterbuch der griechischen Papyrusurkunden, in (1931), 352. 

^ Cf. for possible types J. N. Svoronos, Ta NofiloficiTa rov Kpdrovs ra>v flroXepiaiojv , ni (1904), pis. 15, 29, 
39, 40 , 47, SI- 


On Prof. Gunn's resignation from the editorship of this Journal, his place was taken by Mr. 
C. R. C. Allberry, of Christ's College, Cambridge, and it is to their combined energy that VoL 
XXVI was due. In course of time Mr. Allberry joined the Air Force, with the result that responsi- 
bility for this periodical reverted to one of its earliest editors. The chances of obtaining good 
material for Vol. xxvn looked black at the outset, with excavations at a standstill, museums inac- 
cessible or closed, and all younger colleagues engaged in war work. The usual bibliographies 
(excepting that by Mr. Tod included in the present volume) were rendered impossible by the 
absence of foreign publications. Flappily the Old Guard has come valiantly to the rescue, and our 
members will not be dissatisfied with the fare here provided. How much that fare owes to the 
material and how much — to continue the metaphor — to its culinary preparation it would be in- 
vidious to inquire; but it must be manifest to all that Dr. Johnson, our superlative chef at the 
University Press, has once again excelled himself, and has set a new standard as regards the gar- 
nishing and the dishing up which will, it is hoped, stimulate our purveyors to even keener activity. 
It need not be concealed that we have had to ask ourselves seriously (i) whether the circumstances 
of the moment justified a volume of the present scope, and (2) whether our finances would stand it. 
Encouragement from American friends has gone far to reassure us on the first point; on the second 
we should indeed have had to retrench drastically but for the fact that staunch supporters of the 
Society have come forward to make good the difference between the total cost and what our admir- 
ably prudent Hon. Treasurer would allow us to spend. The Committee are deeply indebted to 
some authors of articles who have not only consented to write them, but also to contribute towards 
their printing. 

Whatever doubts might be entertained by outsiders as to the propriety of scientific publication 
during the worst crisis this country has ever had to face, scholars will no doubt, as a whole, take 
the longer view and realize that our organization had to be kept alive and that it was only by present 
efforts that our future could be assured. When the post-war period arrives, it will become known 
what a large number of our leading researchers have thrown themselves wholeheartedly into the 
common cause. But there have been others, older men, whose duty seemed to lie in intensifying 
their researches and so striving to outstrip their competitors in the field of scholarship. It will 
be curious to learn what the lands under Nazi control, and above all Germany herself, have been 
able to produce in the domains of Egyptology and papyrology in this time of stress. The Danes 
at all events have not been idle, and a monograph by Profs. Lange and Neugebauer on an interesting 
hieratic and demotic cosmological papyrus has reached this country, as well as a long article on 
the Divine Wife of Amun by Prof. Sander-Hansen. From neutral Switzerland has been received 
an interesting little book by Prof. Jequier on his twelve years of excavation in the Memphite 
Necropolis, and many well-wishers will desire to congratulate that admirable archaeologist on this 
rounding off of his work in Egypt. 

Meanwhile British scholars have something to show. The recently issued new volume of the 
Oxyrhynchus Papyri is described below. Temples of Armant, another important work due to our 
Society, was mentioned in the last Notes and News. N. de G. Davies’s stately publication of the 
Tomb of Ramose, the coping-stone to our late President's labours in Egypt, is a magnificent monu- 



ment to his memory, thanks to the combined efforts of author and printer. To the present writer 
is due a large folio volume of Plates introducing to Egyptologists one of the most important secular 
hieratic papyri in existence, called the Wilbotir Papyrus after the distinguished American Egyptolo- 
gist from whose funds the cost of the publication has been defrayed; this deals with the taxation 
of land under Ramesses V, and deep gratitude will be felt to the authorities of the Brooklyn Museum 
for sponsoring so extensive an undertaking; the Text volume is in course of preparation. We 
understand that W. F. Laming Macadam’s book on the inscriptions of Kawa, of which report 
speaks very favourably, is already in the hands of the printer; it is much to be desired that the 
results of the late Professor and IMrs. Griffith’s important excavations on that Nubian site should 
be completely published with as little further delay as possible. We cannot but feel regret that our 
Society’s memoirs on El-^Amarnah, Sesebi, and ^Amarah West are postponed owing to the engage- 
ment of their authors upon war work of various kinds, and the publication of the temple of Sethos I 
at Abydos is likewise at a standstill. 

Dr. Bell writes: Tart XVIII of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, edited by Mr. E. Lobel, Mr. C. H. 
Roberts, and Miss E. P. Wegener, will appear in the autumn of this year. It is a volume of somewhat 
outstanding interest, even in the remarkable series of which it forms part. Theological texts are, 
indeed, of minor importance, though an addition to the few papyrus fragments of Philo is welcome, 
but the new classical fragments give this Part a very notable place among editions of papyri. Frag- 
ments of no less than six of the lost plays of Aeschylus, besides two of his surviving ones, are here 
published; and of the new plays the AlktvovXkoL, the ©ecopol ^ ^IcrOpnaaraL (?), and the Sdvrpiat 
are represented by a fair number of lines. The remains of Alcaeus are increased by a most inter- 
esting, if difficult, poem of biographical interest; there are considerable fragments of Callimachus, 
and not only fragments of poems by Hipponax but also a commentary on him. An imperfect 
but interesting fragment of the so-called Acta Alexandrinorum makes a useful addition to the 
surviving specimens of this class of literature. Among known literary works the Oedipus Rex of 
Sophocles and Plato’s Phaedo are represented by substantial fragments, 

‘Documentary papyri, though not so numerous as in some former volumes, are of good quality 
and include some notable texts. Among them are a long letter, one of the most interesting examples 
of epistolography vet found among the papyri, from an “undergraduate”, probably at the university of 
Alexandria, to his father, a letter announcing the writer’s arrival at Puteoli after a voyage in which 
he “experienced no discomfort such as usually occurs, particularly on one’s first voyage”, another, 
of quite special interest, concerning books and mentioning a bookseller who may have one of 
the works required, two curious Christian letters which, though in Greek, begin with a Latin 
quotation, and some important accounts from the Apion archive.’ 

We have grievous losses to record among our collaborators, colleagues, and other supporters, 
foremost among whom are Prof. C. G. Seligman, the well-known anthropologist, Sir Arthur Evans, 
the famous pioneer of Minoan excavation, and Mr. Harry Burton, the skilled photographer of the 
tomb of Tut^ankhamun and of many of the Theban excavations undertaken by the iMetropolitan 
Museum of New York. Some paragraphs were consecrated to the first and third of these in our 
recently issued Annual Report for 1940. In Sir Arthur Evans we mourn, not only a great scholar 
and very generous patron of archaeology, but also a liberal contributor to our Society; it would be 
otiose to dilate here on a career which has been described at length in the daily papers, and will 
doubtless be dealt with thoroughly in the proceedings of the societies with which he was yet more 
closely associated. Here, however, we may fitly dwell on the work of Miss Bertha Porter (d. 
Oxford, Jan. 17, 1941), inasmuch as she was veiy^ closely associated with the late Professor Griffith, 
the first of our own Society’s students. For many years she had contributed to the Dictionary of 



National Biography and (to quote her obituary notice in The Times) ‘by her labours in the British 
Museum and other libraries, became an expert bibliographer’. Unless the present writer is mis- 
taken, it was to him, despite his youth at the time, that Miss Porter owed her first introduction 
to Egyptology. Casting around for some new field of scientific endeavour when her work on the 
Dictionary came to an end, she copied many of the stelae in the British Museum on behalf of her 
young friend Alan Gardiner. It was only at a later date that she went to Gottingen to study with 
Professor Sethe, and subsequently was recommended by Erman and Sethe as the most suitable person 
to be entrusted with Griffith’s projected conspectus of the ancient monuments. In 1924 Miss Rosalind 
Moss was asked to collaborate, and thus originated that remarkable partnership to which we owe 
the six invaluable volumes of the Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic 
Texts, Reliefs, and Paintings, to which others remain to be added. Though Miss Porter dropped 
out, owing to ill health and old age, before actual publication was far advanced, it was to her that 
the planning and the first stages of this all-important undertaking were mainly due. Apart from 
her literary achievements, Miss Porter will be long remembered for her warm-heartedness, en- 
couragement to young aspirants, and great gifts in various directions. 

At this point we digress a little to pay a tribute to the work of British women in the field of 
Egyptology. Risking the anger of those whose modesty may be embarrassed, we cannot refrain 
from taking this opportunity to express our admiration of the ladies who have thrown their energies 
into our subject. In what other country, though most possess or have possessed some excellent 
lady Egyptologists, has so great a mass of outstanding work been attributable to their talent and 
enthusiasm? The monumental devoted to Egyptian Painting by Mrs. Davies and to the 
temple of Sethos I by Miss Calverley and iMiss Broome, stand side by side with the above-mentioned 
volumes of the Bibliography as pre-eminent examples of feminine achievement. But there are 
many other important names that could have been mentioned, and it is only through fear of omitting 
one or other that we refrain from enumerating them all. Every Egyptologist will be able to fill 
out the lacuna for himself. 

Among foreign scholars we have also to record the deaths of the American Prof. Clarence S. 
Fisher and the French Prof. Hyv^rnat. Fisher excavated for the University of Pennsylvania various 
sites in Egypt and Palestine, perhaps his greatest success being at jMemphis. Unfortunately, his 
published work was very slight, the only book of any size due to him being one on the minor 
cemeter}" of the Old Kingdom at Gizah. Dr. Crum writes with regard to Hyvernat: ‘Born in 1858 
near Lyons, he migrated in 1889, some years in Rome, to the Catholic University at Washing- 
ton. He was an excellent Coptic scholar; the many texts which he published are unlikely to call 
for re-editing. For years past he had devoted himself to the study of the vast Pierpont Morgan 
collection of MSS. Of these he produced, in 1919, a summary Check-List — still our sole guide to 
the contents of the 56 volumes — and he had long been preparing an elaborate Catalogue, unfortu- 
nately left unpublished.’ 

There are many who will be anxious for news of their colleagues abroad, and as regards the 
French we are indebted to Dr. Cerny, himself in Egypt, for interesting information. Great sym- 
pathy will be felt with Prof. Lefebvre in the loss of his son on the field of battle. M. Boreux has 
surrendered his position as Conserv'ateur at the Louvre, M. Drioton having been appointed in his 
place ; but during the absence of the latter in Egypt, where he has been retained as Director of the 
Service des Antiquites for another two years, M. Vandier is replacing him in Paris. M. Jouguet 
has retired from his Directorship of the French Institute at Cairo, and has been lecturing on Greek 
and Roman Histor}" at the University of that city; his successor at the Institute is M. Kuentz. 



Another appointment of interest is that of Mr. A. Rowe as Director of the Museum at Alexandria. 
M. Chevrier, who was in charge of Karnak, is said to be a prisoner of war, and so, too, was that able 
archaeological architect M. Robichon, who, however, has since been released. At Brussels M. 
Capart is said to be well, and to be no less full of scientific activity than is his wont. 

It was hardly likely that much would be going on in the way of excavation, but Dr. Cerny reports 
whatever is to be reported. At Kom esh-Shukafah in Alexandria Rowe has resumed the excavations 
in the catacombs, finding tombs of the first and second centuries a.d. Beautiful jewellery was 
discovered on the body of a lady encased in a coloured and gilded plaster shell modelled in the 
form of a goddess; this comprised a necklace having suspended from a chain a wheel-pendant 
with eight spokes, the emblem of Nemesis; also an armlet among other objects all of gold. 
Nearby in a partly robbed tomb was a female skeleton from which were taken three golden rings 
with a cameo in each; the largest of the rings had an onyx cameo on which were engraved Leda 
and the swan; the cameos of the other rings were of agate, the one with a figure of Harpocrates 
holding a cornucopia and the other showing Mars with spear and shield. Less important tombs 
were also found, and in the hands or mouths of some of the dead were discovered bronze coins 
wherewith to pay the ferryman; the bodies had been placed either in loculi or in troughs, and lay 
on their backs upon a layer of clean sand. 

At Sakkarah Chief Inspector Zaky Saad completely excavated, with funds given by H.I\I. the 
King, a large tomb of ‘Persian’ type near the pyramid of Onnos similar to those found in 1900. 
The shaft, more than 20 metres deep, was filled with sand. At the bottom was found a vaulted 
chamber the limestone walls of which are carved with Pyramid Texts. The owner was one Amen- 
tefnakhte, chief of the king’s bodyguard, and he seems to have lived in the second half of the 
Twenty-sixth Dynasty. The burial chamber was entirely filled with an enormous sarcophagus 
of hard limestone, 4 metres in length. In this was an anthropomorphic coffin of schist. Though 
the tomb was unrobbed, the body did not yield any jewels or indeed objects of any kind. 

At ]\Iit Rahinah to the right of and not far from the road leading to Sakkarah, Mustafa el-Amir, 
the inspector of Sakkarah, discovered walls probably belonging to the temple of Apis. A large 
offering-table by 2 m.), with a base about 5 J m. long, was hewn out of a single block of alabaster. 
This had the form of a bed with lions on both of the long sides; a few steps lead up to the table 
from the base; on the opposite, northern side a circular alabaster base received the water from the 
surface of the table. Close at hand was a smaller bed, likewise consisting of one piece of alabaster, 
bearing the name of king Nechos (Dyn. XXVI) ‘beloved of the living Apis’. West of the large 
bed was another of limestone smaller in size. Other finds were a block of alabaster with the name 
of Amasis and a large alabaster vase of Darius. These excavations came to an end through lack 
of funds. 

Just before this volume goes to Press, the news reaches us of the death, at a ripe old age, of 
the distinguished Russian Egyptologist Wladimir Golenischeff. No details are known, and for an 
adequate notice here both material and space are lacking. Deep regret will be felt at the passing 
of one not only an eminent scholar, but also a great-hearted gentleman, the friend of old and 
young alike, whose innate dignity and simplicity were thrown into sharp relief by heavy pecuniary 
losses at the conclusion of the last war. 

(1 66) 


Giza 11 and Giza 111 , By Hermann Junker. Vienna and Leipzig, 1934 and 1938. //, vi— 21S pp., 16 half- 
tone pis.; ///, vi— 256 pp., 14 pis., 4 coloured, 10 half-tone. 

These two volumes carry on the reports of the campaigns of excavation at Gizah conducted by the 
Viennese Academy under the leadership of Professor Junker, of which the first results were published in 
Giza 1 . Vol. II deals with the mastabas of the early Fifth Dynasty in the western cemetery. The earlier 
part of the book is devoted to archaeological discussions of various topics on which the excavations have 
shed further light, while the second part is concerned with describing the individual tombs, namely, those 
of Ensedjerka, ^leryeb, Kaninisut, and Seshathotpe. The general discussions fall into three main groups, 
of which the first is concerned with the architectural features of the tombs, the second with the methods 
of dating them, and the third with the funerary ritual. 

The architectural section deals in turn with the superstructure of the tomb, the cult-chamber, the false 
door, the serdab, the scenes and inscriptions, and the burial-chamber. Of these, the third receives the 
fullest treatment. The false door strictly so called, which was intended to give the deceased egress from 
his tomb, is considered to be of Lower Egyptian origin, and is contrasted with the early tomb-stelae from 
Abydos, which apparently were primarily intended to mark the spot where the funerary offerings were to 
be made. The two notions soon converged, however, owing to the fact that in Lower Egypt oiferings 
were naturally made at the spot where the deceased could come forth to receive them, and ere long the 
two types of monument became merged in the later form of false door which bore, not only the representa- 
tion of the doorway, but also the name and titles of the deceased, and often the formula of offering. To 
the false door is added as early as the Second Dynasty the scene of the deceased seated at table, which 
has no connexion with the false door qua door, but is obviously relevant to the spot where offerings were 
made. This Speisetischszene is regarded as being possibly of Lower Egyptian origin, though the evidence is 
admittedly inconclusive. Regarding the sculptures and inscriptions of the tombs here described, these are 
concerned almost exclusively with the funerary ritual, the bringing of offerings, and so forth, and do not 
include those scenes of daily life which elsewhere are found in such profusion. The austere style of the 
sculpture and the lack of lively scenes is linked by Junker with the monumental but solemn artistic mood 
of the Fourth Dynasty, with its very sparing use of inscription and decoration. As regards the date of 
these tombs, the author places them in the early Fifth Dynasty, partly on the basis of their situation and 
structure, and partly on the evidence of the names and titles of the owners. 

Not the least interesting portion of Giza 11 is that dealing with the funerary ritual. The first section 
deals with the htp di niswt formula, which, incidentally, is still translated as ‘der Konig sei gnadig und gebe’ 
instead of ‘a boon which the King grants’. Its history is traced from the beginnings down to the developed 
formulas of the later Old Kingdom, but the author entirely ignores Gardiner’s detailed study (Davies and 
Gardiner, Tomb of Amenemhet^ 79 ff.), and his treatment suffers in consequence. Regarding the joint 
formula htp di htp di Inpw (or other god), Junker elaborates a view which apparently originated 

wfith Erman, to the effect that the references to king and god form a dichotomy, and not a combined head- 
ing to what follows. He thinks that htp di niswt may have to be regarded as an abbreviation of the formula 
for food offerings, htp di Inpw (&c.) being a separate formula desiring for the deceased a goodly burial, 
a happy entr}^ into the other world, and so forth. The suggestion is ingenious, but not very convincing. 
Although it is true that in the single formulas the king is usually concerned with food-offerings and the 
gods with burial and future welfare, contrary instances are by no means unknown, and there is nothing 
in the combined formula either in the Old Kingdom or later to suggest that the Egyptians were conscious 
of any division therein of the functions of king and god; see, too, Gardiner’s remarks, op. cit., 88-9. On 
the other hand, the suggestion is rather that of co-operation between sovereign and deity. 

A long section is devoted to a discussion of the identity of ‘the great god’ invoked in such expressions 



as tmih hr ntr r/ ‘honoured with the great god’ and the like. Gardiner and Sethe, commenting on this 
deity in Letters to the Dead, pp. 11-12, point out that although both Re< and Osiris have been considered 
by various authors as good candidates for the title, there is at least a possibility that in tomb-inscriptions, 
particularly those threatening violators of the tombs, this epithet may refer to the dead king. Junker, 
however, who goes into the question at greater length, is of opinion that ‘the great god’ was originally a 
universal sky-god named Hrw ‘the distant one’ whose role and name were taken over at a very early date 
by a falcon-god who as Horns thus became ‘the great god’ and was incarnate in the reigning king. It is 
true that he bases his view principally on Ptolemaic texts, but these late inscriptions do seem often to 
reflect the thoughts and dogmas of a far earlier period, and Junker’s theory possesses some degree of 
plausibility. He admits that at a later date the title of ‘great god’ may have been transferred to Req and 
even, at the end of the Sixth Dynasty, to Osiris, but maintains that neither transference can have occurred 
early, since Osiris often, and in one inscription Re< as well, are named beside ‘the great god’ as separate 
entities. He also remarks that sun-worship in Egypt did not attain the rank of an official state religion 
until the Fifth Dynasty, and that this recognition preceded its entry into the funerary cult. As regards 
the relationship between ‘the great god’ and the king, Junker points out that the epithet ntr r/ could be 
applied to both the living and the dead king, but nevertheless denies that the ntr of the early funerary 
formulas can be the king, on the ground that the deceased can be im^hw with ‘the great god’ and the king 
{niswt) in one and the same inscription. On this and other grounds he thus rejects the view that ‘the great 
god’ to whom appeal is made against tomb-violators can be the dead king. On this point, however, the 
habitual imprecision of Egyptian thought should be borne in mind. Even admitting that the epithet ntr r/ 
belongs primarily to Horus as the universal sky-god, it should not be forgotten that this title, on Junker’s 
own showing, could also be borne by the king, whether alive or dead. When an Egyptian appealed for 
justice to ‘the great god’, may he not have had at the back of his mind the notion that he was at the same 
time appealing to his divine sovereign, the natural fount of justice? Just as he looked to the living king 
to redress injury in earthly affairs, so he might well turn to the dead ruler to avenge his wrongs in ghostly 
matters, whether he regarded him as embodied in Horus or Osiris or simply as his departed lord. 

The remaining discussions are concerned with the formula of ‘travelling on the goodly roads whereon 
the blessed travel’, with the festivals named in the funerary inscriptions, and with the ceremonies per- 
formed at the tomb. Here an attempt is made to deal with the functions of the priests who performed the 
rites, among them the hry tcdb ; the section on this officiant should be read in the light of the later article 
by Gardiner in JEA xxiv, 83 ff. Then follows an account of the funerary boat-journey as depicted in the 
tombs, and finally there is an important discussion of the offering-lists. Here a useful feature is the setting 
out of both the shorter and the longer lists in tables comparing the various versions. Junker places the 
change over to the longer list in the beginning of the Fifth Dynasty. 

The rest of the book is devoted to the individual tombs, and is illustrated with architectural plans and 
diagrams and with line-drawings of the sculptures, supplemented by sixteen photographic plates at the 
end of the volume. Of the tombs here described, the most interesting architecturally is that of the princess 
Ensedjerka, which is not only exceptionally well preserved, but imitates the contemporary form of a noble- 
man’s house with unusual fidelity. In the description of the mastaba of Aleryeb, a good point is made 
regarding the dating of Old Kingdom tombs from the names of localities compounded with royal names. 
It is shown that such place-names cannot be safely used for dating without confirmatory evidence; for 
example, a tomb having place-names compounded only with the name of Cheops does not necessarily date 
from his reign, but simply indicates that at some period in the history of the owner’s family someone 
belonging thereto was endowed with land by that king. In the tomb of Kaninisut occurs the title | , 

a writing hitherto unknown before Saite times. Junker rightly equates it with the Old Kingdom title 
hitherto rendered ‘controller of (the town) l/kmt\ and demonstrates, on the evidence of Pyr. 33^, 
that the true translation is ‘controller of the black jar’, suggesting also that it may have some connexion 
with the cult of Hathor. Another interesting suggestion, made apropos of a title in the tomb of Seshathotpe, 
is that the Queen’s title ‘companion of Horus’, usually read as tist Hr, is really ist Hr. In dis- 

cussing the title hm-ntr Hnty-hm ‘priest of Khantkhem’ on p. 191, the author remarks that he knows of 
no other mention of this god in the Old Kingdom. He must, however, have forgotten the Pyramid Texts, 
for Htity-hm occurs in Pyr. 908^; 1723^2 ; as M-hnty-hm in 419^ and as Horus Hnty~hm in 8106. 


1 68 

Giza III is the last report on these excavations which has been issued. The scene of work is still the 
western cemetery, but here the tombs described are the mastabas of the later Fifth Dynasty, of which the 
greater number belonged to the members of two families, those of Kaninisut and Seshemnufer respectively. 
As in the previous volume, the description of the actual tombs is preceded by discussions of more general 

In dealing with the chronological position of these tombs, the author points out how the political condi- 
tions of Egypt are reflected in the cemetery. Whereas in the early Fourth Dynasty the mastabas of Gizah seem 
to have been confined to members of the royal family, gradually the privilege of burial there was extended to 
high officials not of royal blood, until by the middle of the Fifth Dynasty we find family groups of the tombs of 
such functionaries covering several generations. Offices, too, have become hereditary, and Junker remarks 
that four generations of the family of Senedjem3"eb held the office of controller of public works, while 
the Seshemnufers were royal secretaries ; other instances are also quoted. One reason why many of these 
officials were still buried at Gizah when the royal necropolis was transferred elsewhere was apparently that 
they preferred to have their tombs alongside those of their ancestors, thus simplif\dng the maintenance 
of funerary offerings ; the same batch of gifts could readih" be transferred from tomb to tomb when they 
all lay close together. This leads the author to a discussion of [ Jj u'db-rd (see also JEA xxiv, 88), which 
means ‘reversion’ of food-offerings from temple to tomb and from tomb to tomb; an isolated variant shows 
the second element rd spelt out in full. He also explains the terms - and j] as referring to relatives 
or subordinates who were given a share in the funerary cult of the tomb -owner. In the late Old Kingdom 
there occur at Gizah the tombs of priests who administered the cults of the kings and others who were 
buried there. 

The next section is devoted to a general discussion of the architectural layout and the decoration of the 
tombs. Here a very useful feature is a summary account of the positions and subjects of the sculptured 
scenes in no fewer than sixty-one mastabas and rock-cut tombs at Gizah, which offers valuable material for 
comparison. The above-mentioned occurrence of family groups of tombs is of importance in that it is 
possible to observe the development of architecture and decoration within a given group during several 
generations, the general tendency being towards greater elaboration. Thus within the Seshemnufer group, 
which extends into the beginning of the Sixth Dynasty, the earliest tomb of the series contained but a 
single cult-chamber showing onl)- priests, setwants, and offering-bearers, with an undecorated store- 
room in addition; the latest tomb possessed a pillared gateway flanked with small obelisks and statues 
of the owner, while within are several decorated rooms bearing lively scenes of sport and industry, and 
only in the innermost offering-chamber do we meet the solemn procession to the tomb. Junker shows 
that the appearance of scenes of daily life in the tombs of the Fifth Dynasty is but a revival of an earlier 
custom already observed in the earl)^ tombs of Meydum, but which was temporarily abandoned during the 
Fourth Djmasty for a style which in its purest form eschewed all manner of mural decoration. 

As in Giza //, the author now turns from architectural matters to discuss questions connected with the 
funerary cult. An interesting account of the place-names represented in the procession of offering-bearers 
{Dorfvertreter) and of their significance leads to a discussion of the administration of property devoted 
to the service of the tomb and the officials concerned with this duty; here considerable space is devoted 
to a consideration of the title hkiAizvt, which had a double significance, [a) as ‘bailiff’ in charge of the 
field-work of an estate, translated by Junker as Giitshofmeister and compared with the hdli of a modern 
Egyptian estate, and (b) as the title of a subordinate official of the nome-administration, responsible for a 
given parcel of Crown land. His superior was the hh-hu't-rn, who may be either the controller of Crown 
lands throughout a nome, i.e. the nomarch himself, or else the administrator of a large estate, usually of 
the wakf of a deceased royalty. In Junker’s view the ‘bailiff’s’ duties were concerned solely with the actual 
farming, the clerical side of the administration being wholly distinct. 

Following on this section comes a valuable account of the rites of offering to the deceased; these are 
divided into seventeen distinct ritual acts, which are clearly illustrated in p. 105 ; incidentally it is demon- 
strated that in the purificatory rites never means ‘drop’ of water but always ‘pellet’ of natron. Finally 
there is a discussion of the ka which in the nature of things cannot but lead to contradictory results ; the 
ka can be in the other world to receive the deceased who goes to his ka ; it can accompany him when he 
goes with his ka, they abide together in the Beyond, yet it resides in the tomb where the dead man lies, 


and receives the offerings of his descendants. Hence both the tomb itself and a special part thereof, the 
statue-chamber, can be called hivt-h ‘Mansion of the ka\ while the same term can be applied to the landed 
endowments of the tomb. 

The second part of the book is devoted to an account of eight separate tombs, and is illustrated with 
plans and line-drawings, as well as with fourteen photographic plates, of which the first four reproduce 
in colour the sculptures in the tomb of Seshemnufer III. One has the impression, however, that the line- 
drawings of the sculptures in this third volume are not quite up to the usual standard, and do not fully 
represent the quality of the originals. We cannot but regret, also, the reversion to the old Theinhardt 
hieroglyphic type after using Gardiner’s fount in Gha //, though even there an occasional Theinhardt 
sort is to be found, making a mixture which is a little disconcerting. Nevertheless, such surface blemishes 
do not detract from the general excellence of these admirable and well-indexed books, which are indeed 
essential to the student; if here and there we have ventured on a few criticisms, that is but evidence that 
the works under review have fulfilled the important function of provoking discussion. 

R. O. Faulkner 

Vom Bllde zum Biichstaben. Die Entstehiing der Schrift {Untersuchungen zur Geschichte iind Altertiimskunde 
Agyptens, Bd. xii). By Kurt Sethe, edited by Hermann Kees. Leipzig, J. C. Hinrichs Verlag, 
1939. vi-pSq pp., 2 half-tone pis. 

In this work, Sethe ’s last and posthumous contribution to the invaluable series of Untersuchungen which 
he founded in 1896, the author develops his views on two kindred topics to the understanding of which 
he has contributed on other occasions, namely, the development of writing and the origin of the alphabet. 
Beginning with attempts at communication by means of a single pictorial composition {Bilderweridung), 
examples of which are quoted from various sources, chiefly North America and IMexico, he shows how 
this gradually gives rise to an ideographic script {Bildersckrift) in which not actual events, but objects and 
ideas, are represented by picture-signs which do not change their form with their context, this being the 
primitive basis of — inter alia — the Egyptian, Babylonian, and Chinese scripts. 

The next stage is the development of a phonetic script, as the manifold signs of ideographic writing 
become associated in the mind with the sound rather than with the meaning of the words they represent. 
As a typical example we may take one quoted also by the author: the ideogram 9 for Egyptian hr ‘face’ 
is first used as a phonogram for the liomophonous preposition hr ‘upon’ and its derivatives, and then is 
used simply as a sign for the consecutive consonants h~r in the writing of any word where they occur in 
that order, without any regard to syllabic division. Tliat at least was the course of events in the case of 
the purely consonantal script of Egypt, which depended upon the principle of the rebus for the develop- 
ment of phonetic signs from the original ideograms. In Babylonian, however, events took a rather different 
course, since that language developed a syllabic script in which each sign represented not a consonant or 
group of consonants, as in Egyptian, but a syllable composed of consonant(s)— vowel, or possibly onlv 
a single vowel. Sethe ’s view is that the Babylonian signs obtained their phonetic value from the first 
syllable of the word represented by the original ideogram, thus employing the method of acrophony, but 
in a footnote (p. 28, n. 4) the editor quotes a comment by Prof, von Soden to the effect that Sethe is in 
error here, since the Babylonian syllabic signs take their value from the monosyllabic Sumeriari words 
which they originally represented. According to Sethe, the Chinese syllabary developed from this mono- 
syllabic tongue in a manner similar to that postulated for cuneiform by von Soden, while a few Mexican 
instances suggest that this people was on the road to an acrophonic syllabary when their culture and script 
were destroyed by the Spanish conquest. 

Of the various primary modes of writing invented in ancient times, only three have had any influence 
on the subsequent developments of that art, namely, those of Babylon, China, and Egypt. From the 
cuneiform script of Babylon the Persians chose 41 signs to form a syllabary of their own, while Japanese 
writing is a similar artificial adaptation of Chinese; such adaptations Sethe describes as ‘secondary sylla- 
baries’. To anticipate a little, he claims that from the Egyptian hieroglyphs the Phoenician alphabet was 
ultimately derived, and that this was the parent of all known alphabets with the exception of the Semitic 
dialect spoken at Ras Shamra, which employed an alphabet written with selected cuneiform signs on clay 




tablets. This alphabet had apparently but a short life, and Phoenician inspiration may have underlain its 
invention. The Sabaean alphabet, itself a close relative of the Phoenician, gave rise, curiously enough, 
to two ‘tertiary' syllabaries, the Ethiopic of Abyssinia and the Devanagari of India. 

As regards the origin of the Phoenician alphabet and thus ultimately of our own and all other modern 
alphabets, Sethe of course adheres to the now widely held view of which Gardiner and he have been the 
main protagonists, that it is a development of the Sinai script, which took selected signs from the Egyptian 
hieroglyphs and, on the principle of acrophony based on their Semitic names, used them as alphabetic 
letters. He retraces the steps by which this discovery has been worked out, not omitting to state that the 
really decisive clue was the decipherment by Gardiner on the Sinai stones of the Semitic word Ba^alat^ 
but further makes the point that the idea of a true alphabet could only have arisen among a people in 
contact with Egypt, because the Egyptians, and they alone, already possessed an alphabet which, had 
they been less conservative and realized its possibilities, would ere long have entirely displaced the phono- 
grams w’hich render Egyptian writing so complicated. In Sethe 's view cuneiform, like all other syllabic 
scripts, was in its very nature a cul-de-sac w hich could never in normal development have led to an alphabet. 
Of the various stages through which he traces the growth of our own alphabet from its Phoenician ancestor 
there is no need to speak here, for few scholars will now^ dispute the fact. 

To Sethe's account of the development of the alphabet, which has been summarized above, Dr. S. Schott, 
who prepared his manuscript for publication, has added a postscript. After describing the methods em- 
ployed in converting the materials left by Sethe into a coherent whole, Schott embarks on a review of 
the book in which he controverts Sethe 's view of the ultimate dependence of the Semitic alphabet upon the 
Egyptian hieroglyphs, since he maintains that the Egyptians never had a true alphabet. He likens the 
Egyptian hieroglyphs to the Babylonian syllabar}% since most Egyptian phonograms represent combina- 
tions of consonants. He compares these wdth the cuneiform syllables of consonants and vowels, and con- 
siders that the Egyptian ‘alphabetic letters' are no more true letters than the cuneiform syllables consisting 
of a single vowel. But here he is certainly in error. Whatever may have been the original line of develop- 
ment of the Egyptian uniconsonantal signs, they w^ere certainly felt by the Egyptians themselves as alpha- 
betic letters. This is showm clearly by the fact that on occasion the Egyptians could take a word normally 
written with a phonogram (with or without phonetic complement) and spell it out solely with alphabetic 
letters; a case in point is ^ J J ‘mix', which in one case is written ^ J| # {Sehekkhu, 3), i.e. it is spelled purely 
alphabetically and without any determinative ; other instances could readily be found. Since, furthermore, 
the instance quoted occurs in a secular text of the Middle Kingdom, it shows that the alphabetic spelling 
of Egyptian words is not merely a mark of the oldest texts, as Schott would claim (p. 79). It is thus clear 
that the Egyptians were conscious of possessing a consonantal alphabet which they could and did on 
occasion use without the addition of bi- or triliteral phonograms, and only their innate conservatism 
prevented them from taking the further step of discarding a mass of unnecessary phonetic lumber from 
their writing. 

If the view be accepted that the Egyptian alphabet is as much a true alphabet as the Phoenician, then 
the whole of the ground is cut aw^ay from under Schott's attempt to minimize the influence of the former 
on the formation of the Semitic alphabet. Even if the course of events is not yet crystal clear, w^hat evidence 
there is strongly suggests that the inventor of the Sinaitic alphabet got the basic notion of an alphabet 
from Egypt and invented one to suit his own tongue, taking such Egyptian hieroglyphs as w'ere suitable 
and adapting them to his own purpose ; from this script there can be little doubt that the Phoenician alpha- 
bet was derived, see the comparative tables published by Gardiner, JEA iii, pi. 2, and by Sethe on p. 58 
of the w’ork under review'. 

How'ever obscure may be the details of this development, to deny its Egyptian basis is surely to reject 
whatever evidence there is in favour of personal prepossessions. The existence of a cuneiform alphabet 
at Ras Shamra in no way affects the arguments of Sethe and Gardiner, since the Ras Shamra alphabet 
is clearly a short-lived local effort outside the main stream, it having disappeared without leaving descen- 
dants. The probabilities are that the Ras Shamra folk got the idea of an alphabet from Phoenician traders, 
but, since they W'ere accustomed to using the clay tablet, preferred to construct their alphabet from the 
cuneiform script, w'hich was that best adapted to their writing materials. 

R. O. Faulkner 


The Hyksos Reconsidered {Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization^ No. i8). By Robert M. Engberg. 

University of Chicago Press, 1939. xii^5o pp. 

Although the story of the conquest of Egypt by the Hyksos and their subsequent expulsion is familiar 
to all students of the ancient history of the Near East, at least in its broadest outlines, the details of this 
great disaster are still wrapped in obscurity ; not only have we no contemporary narrative of events, we do 
not even know with certainty who the Hyksos were. In the study under review, Dr. Engberg has attempted 
to gather up into a convenient compass all that is know n or can be deduced about the Hvksos, and he has 
put forw^ard some extremely interesting suggestions. 

He first deals with the ancient literary sources. After quoting Josephus’ excerpts from Manetho, he 
passes in review the Egyptian references to the conquest and subsequent expulsion. He accepts Breasted s 
view that after the fall of Sharuhen the Hyksos continued to be the dominant factor in Palestine and Syria 
until finally crushed by the victories of Tuthmosis III. On the matter of the actual descent upon Egypt, 
Dr. Engberg questions the current view" of the catastrophic nature of the invasion, and suggests that the 
incoming of the Hyksos began with a gradual infiltration as early as the middle of the Twelfth Dynasty, 
and that when Egypt became politically helpless through disunion, their domination arose by usurpation 
from wdthin rather than from without, though he does not exclude the possibility of an invasion as w"ell. 
He is also disposed to question the view that the Hyksos pow er extended far above Middle Egypt. 

Here the present reviewer is inclined to differ from the author in some respects. While not denying the 
possibility of a certain amount of Hyksos infiltration into Egypt before the invasion, one cannot ignore the 
tradition embodied in Manetho that the invasion itself came as a sudden and overwhelming catastrophe, 
bringing destruction and enslavement in its train, and it is in the highest degree probable that, as has long 
been thought, the utter collapse of resistance in the Delta w as due as much to the possession by the victors 
of the new weapon of horse and chariot as to disunion among the Egyptians ; Dr. Engberg himself remarks 
on the close association of the horse with the Hyksos. As to the extent of their dominion in Upper Egypt, 
the author seems seriously to underestimate the significance of the traces of Hyksos temple-restoration at 
Gebelen. It is hardly conceivable that the alien rulers w^ould have executed architectural work in a town 
which was not, at least for the time being, firmly in their hands. 

At the same time, however, it seems likely that Hyksos rule over Upper Egypt proper, including the 
Thebaid, was not of very long duration, and perhaps I may be forgiven for putting forward at this point 
a conjecture of my owm. At about 1730 b.c. the Hyksos in their first onset apparently overran all Egypt to 
a point somewhere south of Gebelen. Since, however, roughly a century later w"e find the Seknenre^ 
dynasty ruling an independent Theban kingdom which had its northern frontier at Cusae, it does not seem 
likely that the Hyksos held the Thebaid more than perhaps sixty or seventy years. It is therefore possible 
that even after the invaders had advanced beyond Thebes, there still remained in the far south a nucleus 
of Egyptian resistance which they failed to overcome, and I am tempted to place the front line of this 
stubborn opposition at the easily defensible gorge of Silsilah, the ancient frontier of Zety-land. If there 
be any truth in this supposition, it will have been this band of Egyptian die-hards w"ho eventually flung 
the Hyksos out of Thebes and established there a kingdom which w as ultimately to prove the downfall 
of the invader. As for the events following the outbreak of the War of Liberation under King Kamose, 
the main facts are sufficiently well known to be beyond dispute. 

As evidence for his view of early infiltration into Egypt, Dr. Engberg cites the occurrence of pottery of 
Tell el-Yahudiyah type in Nubia and Egypt in the mid-Twelfth Dynasty, and, likewise on the basis of 
archaeological data, puts the first appearance of the Hyksos in Syria at about 1900 b.c. This w ould argue 
a very rapid spread southw^ard of the new" powder, wffiich might w ell be accounted for by their possession 
of the horse and chariot. As regards the racial connexions of the Hyksos, the author admits that the first 
wave of invaders which overwhelmed Egypt w as largely Semitic, or at least Semitic-speaking, but, follow ing 
A. Gotze, he argues for a strong Hurrian element, and, in view of their possession of the horse, possibly 
even an Aryan admixture. It is true that such racial questions, apart from the known Semitic element 
in the Hyksos, are at present rather a matter for speculation, but they indicate an interesting line of 
investigation which might well be followed up in the better times to come, when once again the Near 
East will be open to archaeological exploration. 

R. O. Faulkner 



Die Idee z'om Totengericht in dev dgyptischen Religion! By Joachim Spiegel. Leipziger agyptologische 
Studien, Heft 2. Gliickstadt & Hamburg, J. J. Augustin, [1935]. Pp. 81. 

The author of this interesting essay, the second of a new series edited by Professor Wolf, has set himself 
the task of tracing the origin and development of the idea of Judgement after death in Ancient Egypt. While 
welcoming most sincerely Herr Spiegel’s contribution to the subject there will, we fear, be many who will 
regret that it is expressed in such difficult language, and, in our opinion, at a quite unnecessary length. 
The reviewer feels strongly that whar is said in this essay could have been much simpliiied and compressed, 
and for the benefit of those who have not the time or opportunity to work through it he gives herewith a 
summan’ of the contentions which it sets forth. 

The Egyptians believed, says the author, that all activity ended in a concrete result, which result remained 
a final and unchanging quantity. Thus the tomb and its paraphernalia formed the concrete result of the 
life of the owner. Together with its statues, pictures, and inscriptions it summed up, as it were, the life 
of the dead person and rendered that life imperishable. For the early Egyptian idea of the Hereafter was 
not the idea of a different realm, a spiritual world into which the deceased must venture. It was, on the 
contrary, a prolongation ad infijiitiini of the present life, which prolongation was accomplished by the tomb 
and its ritual. The tomb was the concrete result of a man’s life, a condition which, it was hoped, would 
remain unchanged for ever. In its simplest form the Hereafter consisted of life in the tomb itself, the tombs 
of the nobles being grouped around the pyramid of the king, the whole idea being of a continuation of the 
court-life on earth. In the more developed conception of a supra-earthly existence, the idea was still 
entirely modelled upon this world, the dead passing into the presence of the ‘great god' (/.c. Re<^) just as they 
had on earth into that of Pharaoh. The whole measure of the next world was the measure of this. In the 
Old Kingdom the solid order of this world, with its stable ranks and classes, was thought to continue, in 
fact to be identical, in the next life. The paraphernalia of the tomb was an expression of the concrete rights 
and social worth of the deceased, which would continue to avail him in the Hereafter. 

When, however, at the end of the Old Kingdom the social order began to break up, the whole of this 
idea was thrown out of gear. On all hands were the rich and powerful sunk to poverty and weakness, the 
poor and wretched risen to high estate. Even as the nobles had wrested from Pharaoh part of his earthly 
power, so they had seized for themselves part of his tomb-paraphernalia and ritual. The necessary con- 
sequence of this was that the tomb ritual became divorced from the real values of wffiich it had once been 
the expression and tended to degenerate into a mere magical formula by which the dead person could attain 
a rank in the next world higher than he had enjoyed in this. The only antidote to such a tendency would be 
found in the creation of a new standard, and this new standard had its origin in the beliefs surrounding the 
sun-god Re^. According to the old idea the king, when he entered the next wmrld, w-as acknowledged as 
legitimate son and heir by Re<. In the same manner excry individual, who in this wmrld stood in some sort 
of relation to the king, hoped to secure a position in the Hereafter enjoying exactly the same relation. 
When, however, as described above, the social order became inverted and the funerary ritual was applied 
to persons other than those for wffiom it had been once intended, the private individual could no longer, 
like the king, hope for positions and rank on the grounds of actual earthly position and rank. The more 
spiritual mind, therefore, wffiich w^as not satisfied that the funerary ritual should degenerate into mere 
magic, began to claim that the real basis for immortality w^as the merit acquired by a righteous life — this 
wmuld render the next W'orld attainable by the general run of mankind. The righteousness of Req as creator 
and ruler of the Universe, was the main ingredient of the conception of Judgement after death which 
W'as to develop out of this new^ idea. The cult of Osiris, on the other hand, had no influence on its develop- 
ment. Originally hostile to the dead, Osiris had secured his favourable connexion with them by merging 
into the person of a prehistoric king, thus becoming the prototype of dead kings. The immortality of the 
Osiris w'orshipper would depend upon identification wfith his god, wffio had died and come to life again, 
and that could be properly true only of the Pharaoh himself. The application of this idea to others w'as 
merely the result of that same political upheaval which transferred the wffiole funerary ritual of the king 
to non-royal persons. Since, then, this wholesale transference resulted in the funerary ritual degenerating 

^ This review^ w^as offered for consideration and discussion only a little time before Mr. Shorter's death. The 
intended discussion w'as thus rendered impossible, but the reviewer's analysis of an obscure monograph is well 
worthy of publication even at this late date. — Ed. 


into a magical formula, as a protest against which the idea of a Judgement founded upon ethical values came 
into being, it must necessarily follow that to the Osiris cult itself, which was properly concerned only with 
the king, this idea of the Judgement must have been completely alien. The Osiris cult was concerned onlv 
with the magical divinizing of the dead, and contributed nothing at all to the idea of Judgement after death 
with which, owing to the triumph of his cult, Osiris is henceforward closely associated. V\T can no longer 
speak of an 'Osirian Judgement'. 

The most radical development of thought which brought about the conception of a Toiengericht was the 
new belief that evil was an offence to God, and not to men only. It was the change from the earthlv idea 
of an accusation brought against a dead person in the next world by an injured partv, to the supernatural 
idea of an accusation by God, thus presupposing an ethical norm. The tomb-biographies, if followed from 
the Old to the ^Middle Kingdom, show the beginning of this idea. The dead man identities himself with 
the accepted ideal of a good man— an un-individual, universal conception of righteousness tvpical of the 
Egyptian outlook on the world in general. This is demonstrated with examples, and tiic demonstration 
carried on through the Instruction of iNlerikare^ and the Lebcnsmiide. The whole idea of the Toiengericht 
is at first attached to the solar theology, Re< being the divine judge, and even in the Book of the Dead the 
original solar aspect is visible beneath the surface. The gradual annexation of the Totengericht bv the 
Osiris cult and its consequent transformation into a magical formula are demonstrated by a studv of certain 
portions of spells XVII and CXXV. The remainder of the essay is concerned with an examination of the 
Judgement as it appears in the Book of the Dead during the Xew Kingdom, upon which Herr Spiegel has 
some interesting things to say.^ He concludes by saying that the association of righteousness with the god 
(Re< or Osiris) has little or no connexion with the origin of the Totengericht. The latter is grounded upon a 
purely human and earthly basis, the god being brought into line with this afterwards, so as to be thought 
of as loving good and hating evil. 

A. W. Shorter 

The Cat in Ancient Egypt, illustrated from the collection of Cat and other Egyptian figures formed bv N. and 
B. Langton. Cambridge, at the University Press, 1940. Small qto. xii-r 88 pp., 20 collotype plates. 
255. net. 

Members of our Society will remember how charmingly our Exhibition in 1936 was enlivened bv the 
collection of cat-figures formed by Mr. and Mrs. Langton. There were cats in all sorts of materials, seated, 
standing, crouching, cat families, cats in company with various deities, cats with their worshippers, cats on 
scarabs. It was a happy inspiration of the owners to specialize in these not uncommon relics of Egyptian 
antiquity, and the permanent record of their 336 specimens forms a monograph of a type new^ and welcome 
to Egyptology. The book is very attractive, well written and well printed, and though the authors claim no 
deep erudition, they have gathered together much information on the subject, and set it forth in a pleasing 
manner. They wwld hardly pretend, I think, that many of their specimens are of \ery high artistic merit 
nor, to judge from a rather desultor}^ search among the books at m.y disposal, do examples of exquisite quality 
exist anywhere. The Cairo Museum appears to possess some bronzes of superior preser\^ation, but none of 
outstanding craftsmanship.’ My own preference, among those I have found illustrated, is for that in the 
Louvre of a cat playing with its little one.^ The king of Egyptian cats, however, is undoubtedly the glorious 
representation in an Eighteenth-Dynasty Theban fresco preser\’ed in the British Aluseum,-^ and I am a little 
surprised that this has not been mentioned in the Introduction. A word of special commendation is due for 
the way in which the rare inscriptions in the present collection have been reproduced and translated ; here 
the authors had the help of Mr. H. W. Fairman. If I have any less favourable criticism to make, it is that I 
am unconvinced that the plates could not have been bettered. 

Alan H. Gardiner 

^ e.g. that the series of denials of sin made by the deceased in Chap. CXXV are to be taken in close con- 
nexion with the weighing of the heart. As the deceased denied each specific sin, the balance indicated whether 
he was telling the truth or not. 

2 See Daressy, Statues de Divinites, in Cat. gen. dii Musee dii Caire, ii, pi. 50. 

3 C. Boreux, Miisee du Louvre: Antiquity eqyptienncs. Catalogue-guide , ii, pi. 53. 

N. M. Davies, Ancient Egyptian Paintings, ii, pi. 66. 



Uiconomie royale des Lagides. By Claire Preaux. Bruxelles, Fondation figyptologique Reine filisabeth, 
1939. Pp. 646. 

A good deal has been written on the economic structure of Ptolemaic Egypt, but most works on the 
subject recent enough to incorporate the large amount of material published in the last thirty years are 
either devoted to particular problems or are broad general surveys, not going into detail. There was 
therefore need of a systematic and comprehensive treatment. This is supplied by the present volume. 
There is nobody more fitted to perform the task than IMlle Preaux. All students of papyrology are familiar 
with the articles and reviews contributed by her to the Chronique d'Egypte and other periodicals, articles 
invariably distinguished by wide knowledge of the subject, the gift of acute and penetrating analysis, the 
power to educe from a multitude of often trivial details some general principle or broad line of development, 
and a lively pen which gives interest to even the least attractive themes. These qualities are conspicuous 
in the volume under review, for which Allle Preaux ’s incidental studies of Ptolemaic problems are now seen 
to have been a preparation, and which, even in so fluid a subject as papyrology, where new discoveries are 
always liable to upset the most careful construction or render obsolete the most complete collection of 
material, is likely to remain for years a standard work. 

As Allle Preaux emphasizes in her preliminaiy^ survey of the sources, the evidence is always incomplete 
and haphazard and often wholly inadequate. It is, too, geographically ill distributed, a serious handicap 
when dealing with a country where topographical conditions and administrative arrangements showed 
marked differences. What is true of the comparatively well-documented Fayytim is not necessarily true 
of the much more sparsely represented Thebaid ; what can be predicated of that may be quite inapplicable 
to the Delta, for which we have practically no Ptolemaic evidence. Naturally, therefore, there are numerous 
problems which defy a satisfactory- settlement, or of which any solution must at best be provisional. That 
not a few of Mile Preaux ’s conclusions may prove untenable on a closer view or in the light of new material 
she would herself be the first to admit ; but she shows an admirably critical spirit, stating the evidence fairly 
and, so far as I can judge, fully, rarely if ever forcing it, and allowing due consideration to factors which 
make in a contrary^ direction, while she never commits the blunder, too common among scholars, of treating 
the probable of one section as the proved of the next. To discover errors of fact or interpretation, if they exist, 
w ould require a closer knowledge of the field than the present reviewer can claim. I would merely note that 
her rendering of l^ios Adyo? as ‘compte prive’ (p. 409) is now generally regarded as inexact (‘special account’ 
is truer to the facts). 

When Air. Sherman LeRoy Wallace published his Taxation in Egypt from Augustus to Diocletian many 
who w elcomed that invaluable work must have sighed for a similar one on the Ptolemaic tax system. This 
Allle Preaux has now given us; and she has given much more. 'She treats other sources of revenue than 
taxes; she deals with expenses as well as revenues; and she supplies (a matter in which Mr. Wallace’s 
book, for all its merits, left a good deal to be desired) a general estimate and evaluation of the w hole system. 
The formal exposition of this is found in the concluding chapter, ‘Fonctionnement de Teconomie royale’, 
but all through the volume we find, as those familiar with her w-ork would expect, general reflections, little 
touches which bring out the significance of an isolated fact or single institution, or a group of facts or 
institutions, and show its bearing on the royal policy or its significance for historical development. Such 
are the reasons suggested for the absence from Ptolemaic Egypt of that liturgical system so conspicuous 
in Roman times (p. 46) ; her remark on the possible co-existence of monopolies with taxes on the workers 
in the monopoly (‘le monopole annule I’initiative economique, mais non la vie economique’, p. 113); those 
on the policy which inspired the customs tariff (pp. 375 f.) or on the reasons for the limited development of 
personal taxes (pp. 379 f.); her suggestion that if it had lasted longer ‘I’empire aurait sans doute re^u un 
regime fiscal unifie’ (p. 423); and many others. 

So many scholars of outstanding ability have studied the Ptolemaic period that any very novel conclusions 
are hardly to be expected from a new- treatment of the subject. What Mile Preaux does provide is a reasoned 
and critical survey which sums up the know ledge and the theories so far arrived at and corrects exaggerated 
views. Impressed by the sad mess which the Romans eventually made of the government of Egypt, some 
scholars have given a too favourable picture of their predecessors ; others, in reaction from this estimate, 
have unduly stressed the failures of the Ptolemaic regime. Mile Preaux, resolutely refusing to allow undue 



weight to any single aspect of the development, as revealed by our evidence, returns a balanced and, as it 
seems to me, essentially just verdict. 

On the whole, though she brings out all that w'as well designed in the system, her judgement is not 
favourable. The Ptolemaic dynasty was Macedonian in origin, but we rightly think and speak of its govern- 
ment as Greek. One might expect, therefore, remembering the Greek gift for philosophy, that the system 
established would embody, however imperfectly, some general theory of government. It is clear that this 
was not the case. As Mile Preaux remarks, in one of her pregnant asides (p. 208), ‘Teconomie lagide ne 
poursuit pas la realisation de quelque ideal scientifique ou social precon^u; elle n’est qu'un tissu de 
problemes pratiques, resolus par des moyens pratiques’. It used to be supposed, for example, that at least 
the early Ptolemies favoured the Greeks as against the Egyptians, but there is really no evidence for any 
policy of racialism. Till the Battle of Raphia they employed exclusively Greek or Hellenized troops; but 
that was because their armies were recruited (apart from the Macedonians) from mercenaries, and mercenaries 
were drawn from Greece or the Hellenized peoples of Asia. They employed Greek officials, engineers, 
financiers; but that was because the Greek world supplied the sort of talents they required. If an Egyptian 
possessed the necessary qualifications he was not excluded on the ground of race. Again, we think of 
monopolies as characteristic of the Ptolemaic industrial and commercial system; but it was not the only 
method, nor was there any single unvaiydng pattern ; each case was treated on its merits, in a purely practical 
way. We can find in Ptolemaic Egypt elements of mercantilism (see p. 432) or of capitalism; but the 
Ptolemies were out for no ‘-ism’; their end was practical, not theoretic. 

What then was this end.' Mile Preaux excellently sums it up under four heads (p. 431): ‘accumuler le 
plus de richesse possible, depenser le moins possible, changer le moins possible I’ordre existant, courir le 
raoins de risques possibles.’ The Lagid regime was in fact not the embodiment of any theory of govern- 
ment, any ideal of organized life. It may, in its best days, be compared with an efficient and adaptable 
commercial firm ; and the present volume shows well the dangers of such a conception. A State, however 
practical may be the aims of its government, is not, and cannot be, just a commercial firm. A commercial 
firm is formed for a specific and limited end ; its employees have a life and an interest independent of it ; 
if unsatisfactory they can be dismissed, if dissatisfied they can give notice. The end of a State is far more 
complex, and its citizens are an integral part of it; it and they stand and fall together; they can neither 
contract out of it nor be dismissed. The concentration of interest on the exploitation of Egypt as a great 
estate, combined with the resolute determination to take the minimum of risk, was thoroughly disastrous, 
though at first the business efficiency of the earlier rulers and their agents produced real prosperity. Mile 
Preaux well shows the effect of their introduction, into a country where Naturalmrtschaft had been the 
rule, of a money economy. This was inevitable when Egypt was made an integral part of the Hellenistic 
world; but since the old economic system could not be changed in the without a more drastic re- 
organization than the Lagids were prepared to undertake, the money economy was orientated towards 
Alexandria and the outer w^orld ; it did not create a big purchasing public within the country or stimulate 
a lively internal trade. Thus it tended rather to lower than raise the standard of living among the Egyptian 
peasantry. When the empire began to shrink, external sources of revenue shrank with it. Meanwhile the 
desire to avoid risk inspired dubious methods of securing the internal revenue. The responsibility of 
officials and tax-farmers for the full payment of the quotas required from them led inevitably to oppression 
and crooked methods of raising money. The pressure of the Egyptian ‘Church’, eager to recover lost 
privileges, the constant effort of the military cleruchs, on whom the King relied for his army, to convert 
their contingent holdings into hereditary property, won from a government ever more and more conscious 
of its weakness concessions which lowered the total yield of taxes except in so far as these could be shifted 
on to other shoulders. Thus, although the king might honestly desire to remedy the sufferings of the 
people, though high officials might issue to their subordinates warnings and exhortations which breathe 
the most excellent sentiments, though heavier penalties might be imposed on evil-doers, such attempts 
to rectify abuses were bound to fail while the basis of the system remained unchanged. As ?vllle Preaux 
well remarks (p. 525), ‘la severite des peines n’a jamais donne vigueur a des ordonnances qui pretendent 
redresser les vices d’une societe sans en atteindre les causes et, particulierement, un droit penal feroce n’a 
jamais rendu la force aux pouvoirs souverains ebranles’. Nor was there any moral force that could supply 
the deficiencies in the economic fabric, for the whole system had tended to eliminate a factor which only a 



free acceptance by the governed of the social order can give; to quote Mile Preaux again (p. 568), *une 
notion economique ne saurait constituer une fin morale'. 

The histoiy^ of Egypt during the millennium covered by the Greek papyri (of the dynastic period I am 
not competent to speak) shows a curious uniformity. Whatever differences there might be in the details of 
administration (and they were not few), the underlying spirit was the same and the development followed 
broadly the same lines throughout the Ptolemaic, the Roman-Byzantine, and the Arab periods: first a new 
efficiency and force in the administraiion, with a consequent increase of prosperity, then, as the first impulse 
exhausted itself and the underhung vices of a system based on exploitation once more made themselves 
felt, a steady and progressive decline. Egypt is thus an object lesson for political theorists; and it is not 
the least merit of Mile Preaux s volume that, while presenting a comprehensive survey and investigation 
of the known evidence, in which she neglects no relevant detail, she brings out so clearly, not in pursuance 
of any parti-pris^ but indirectly, by the objective statement of facts and a severely critical analysis, the 
undying truth that as a governm.cnt sows so shall it reap. 

H, I. Bell 

Catalogue of Greek and Latin Papyri and Ostraca in the Possession of the University of Aberdeen. Edited by 
Eric G. Turner. (Aberdeen University Studies, No. 116.) Aberdeen, The University Press, 1939. 
8vo. XX— 1 16 pp., 5 pis. Ss. 6d. 

In this volume are edited all the Greek and Latin papyri at Aberdeen that the editor considers to be worthy 
of publication. It includes in all 229 texts, of which only a small proportion, and this mainly receipts, is 
complete. Of these texts thirty-eight are ostraca and ninety-six are summaries. The collection is an ex- 
tremely mixed and varied one, containing theological and literary pieces as well as non-literary documents. 
There are texts dating from the third century b.c. to the eighth centur}" a.d. ; eight only are Ptolemaic. The 
provenance of the majority of the papyri is the Fa\^um; from it come also a few- of the ostraca, though these 
latter are chiefly from Upper-Egyptian sources. 

The greater part of the literary texts had already been published by Winstedt {Class. Quart, i, 258 ff.) and 
are here republished more adequately ; the remainder are very fragmentary and of little importance. Besides 
the Latin fragment of St. John’s Gospel, the theological texts include a narrative of the Baptism of Jesus, 
showing Coptic influence, and hymns. 

The non-literary papyri, which are much more numerous, refer to all manner of public and private 
activities. The more interesting among them are an official circular concerning the exemption of priests from 
XwpiKai AeLrovpylaL^ a receipt for corn transport fees which throws new light upon the transportation of 
grain for shipment from the Fayyum, receipts for the desert guard tax of an unusual kind, a Latin receipt 
following Greek formulae, and four ostraca of a new type, containing records of payment of the beer tax. 
The summary publications include several examples of new or rare words. 

The texts are accompanied by introductions describing and discussing their contents and are followed by 
short commentaries and in most cases translations. The illustrations include the Latin receipt and the 
Baptism of Jesus ostracon; one whole plate is devoted to literary fragments. 

Although he has not had the opportunity to add a great deal to our knowledge of Graeco- Roman Egypt, 
Mr. Turner deserves credit for so carefully editing texts that often can mean very little by themselves. In 
most cases he has not attempted to do much in the \vay of restoration, but has preferred to publish in the 
hope that he is providing clues for the understanding of connecting fragments in other collections. 

H. G. M. Bass 

Publicatiofis de la Societe Fouad 1 de Papyrologie. Textes et Documents III. Les Papyrus Fouad 1 Nos. i-8g. 
Edited by A. Bataille, O. Gueraud, P. Jouguet, N. Lewis, H. Marrou, J. Scherer, W. G. Waddell. 
Cairo, Imprimerie de Tlnstitut Fran^ais d'Archeologic Orientale, 1939. xii 4-254 pp., 8 pis. 

This is one of the best editions dealing with papyri, second only to the publications of Grenfell, Hunt, and 
Wilcken. The seven editors, well-known American, British, and French papyrologists, take only occasionally 
joint responsibility for a text, e.g. for No. 8, a difficult fragment which deals with the celebrations in Alexan- 
dria of Vespasian’s ascent to the throne and sheds new light on the ruler cult in the Roman Empire. Nos. 
10-14 have already been published, but are carefully revised by A. Bataille and O. Gueraud. 



The most important texts, and at the same time the best edited ones, are those which form part of J. 
Scherer’s share of the publication. I specially mention No. 21 , a virofimrifiarLafios on the immunitas of veterani 
which is connected with Pap. Yale Inv. 1528 and has recently been discussed by A. Segre, Journ. Rom. Stud. 
XXX, 153 ff. and, more convincingly, by W. L. Westermann, Class. Phil, xxxvi, 21 ff. The administrative 
problem behind this difficult text is, in my opinion, the deductio veteranorum. Next in importance is No. 46, 
a loan, according to which the value of i mnaeion of gold was 90 silver drachms in 23/2 B.c. We knew 
already that the mnaeion of gold was equal to more than 80 and less than 90 denarii during the second half 
of the first and the earlier half of the second centuries a.d. {cf. Klio, xxv, 124 ff.). The new text proves, 
finally, that the provincial silver drachm of Egypt, which was reduced to one- quarter denarius by Tiberius, 
was made of equal value with the denarius by the Roman administration during the earlier decades of 
Augustus, except for a small discount. 

The economic texts dealt with by N. Lewis and H. Marrou’s edition of letters written by monks of the 
sixth century a.d. give useful solutions of special questions. A. Bataille’s No. 85, a gentleman’s letter to 
his brother who is sowing his wild oats in female society, is a gem and will be often made mention of. 

A few restorations and emendations may be suggested. In No. 44 (Scherer), 1. 30 SaveiaKov seems a 
better emendation of the unintelligible Sa^xeiovKov than the editor’s Baveiovxov. Restore in No. 25 (Waddell), 
col. II, 1. 5 [KaT{}y]€\Lip€ avTovs dTrd[vTas] rovs, in col. II, 1. 7 Tovr[wv /x]€/x(^o/i€^a, and, perhaps, in col. 11,1. 15 
[o /cjoivos* Trarrip Z€v\^ et?] to fieXXov xpdvov. Restore in No. 57 (Waddell), 1. 15 8[o]oAov. A few printer’s 
mistakes have been overlooked on p. 252, but no serious ones (correct p. 21, ‘L. 6’ to ‘L. 9’ and p. 164, 1. 15 
iSwKcv). F. M. Heichelheim 

Papyri Societatis Archaeologicae Atheniensis {IJpayfxarelaL r^s* AKaSr^filas AOtjvwv). By Georgios A. 

Petropulos. Vol. I. Athens, 1939. xxvi+470 pp., 24 plates, 

A newly formed collection of papyri will always be of interest to scholars, especially if it has a fairly good 
standard and has been well edited. Therefore it is with pleasure that we welcome this publication of the 
seventy best pieces from the collection of the Archaeological Society of Athens, which includes, with trans- 
lations and notes, texts from the time of Zenon in the third century B.c. to the Byzantine period. 

However, some additions to and corrections of the editor’s restorations are necessary. Some but not many 
of his readings seem to be uncertain, and will, we hope, receive due revision after the end of the war. I give 
a few examples which do not require lengthy discussion. No. i, line i : restore d^liwv ypd<f)ai instead of aTro- 
Xoy€i(jOaL\. No. 3, line 7: restore 7 ropev\Td}^. No. 14, lines 33-4: read and restore: *Qs | [Kara/ce;(a>/3to-/xeV7j 
€V877]/xoo't<p(cp.P.Rendel Harris 83, line 16; also 146, line 7 for this formula). No. 18, lines 15-17: The year 3 
of Marcus Aurelius and Verus (a.d. 162/3) restored here. The titles Parthicus of the Emperor Marcus 

and Felix of Verus would be unofficial provincial honours well understandable immediately after the first 
great victories in Armenia and IMesopotamia : ] ^ y AvroKpdropos KaLcr{apos) | [MdpKov AvprjXlov A]yT(py€l^ 
yov{?) nap6{LKOv) | [SePaarov /cat Ovri]pov‘Apix{€VLaKov) (?) Eyrvxovs Sepaarov. 

The alternative ] Ay AvroKpdropo^ KaLcr{apos) \ [M{dpKOv) Avp{r)XLov) vlov O^LOV A^yripyeiyov nap9{LKOv) 
I [M€y{dXov) Il€Ovy{pov) AXc^dvSjpov cr(e^oi;s-) (?) Eyrvxovs Ee^aorrov which would date the text in the 
year 3 of Alexander Severus (a.d. 223/4) is not very attractive in spite of P. Fay. 20. No. 19, lines 16-17: 
restore Bepalwatg Tj[B€ Kvpla. Tlepl 8 e] | Xolttcjv. No. 70, lines 3~4* restore Ik rravros t 67 t\ov €t? Trat^ra] | tqttov. 

The notes of the edition show an inclination to sur\’ey the complete problems touched upon, perhaps 
owing to an intention of Professor Petropulos to create a guide and text-book for future papyrological 
research in Greece ; but they are, on account of this, no less useful and to the point. The editor can be con- 
gratulated upon his achievement and will certainly allow me to conclude with the wish that there may be 
many successors in papyrological research in his country. F. M. Heichelheim 

Voruntersuchungen zu einer Grammatik der Papyri der nachchristlichen Zeit. By S. G. Kapsomenakis. 

Miinchener Beitrage zur Papyrusforschung usw. Heft 28. Munich, 1938. Pp. xvi-j-iqS. 

Long ago Albert Thumb delivered a lecture to the Classical Association {Cl. Quart. ^ 1914^ 181-205) on 
‘The Value of Modem Greek for the Study of Ancient Greek’. This doctrine, long accepted by philologists, 
is given new point by this book, for by means of his knowledge of modern Greek the author is enabled to 
throw light on many dark places in the papyri. For instance in P. Flor. l, 50, 2 [HI] diro KoppLov ds Kopfiov 



is interpreted as ‘vine by vine’ where both the word (Kop/xt) and the distributive expression are modem 
Greek. In the same way K. sees a compound adverb dadfia in P. Russ-Georg. ill, 4, 19 (cf. etWTra^, €t<TTdT€, 
etc.); for <f>iovqv avrw i^dXofiev ‘we urge insistently’ MG ^dvw {t^) (j>o)infi is quoted; in P. Oxy. 1299, 5 Imra 
dno = ixerd ‘after’, as in late and MG ; in this pap. 1 . 8 Trepav — Tripvai ‘last year’ and not the editor’s reading 
(^v}7Tep while is the MG adverb ‘this year’ and not ‘yearly’; in PGM, ii, 13, 136 /cara/cou 

is the imperative of KaraKdpai \ ibid, 438 /SoAc irapd /xepos* = ‘lay on one side’ cf, MG Trapdpepa] in P. Oxy. 
xrv, 1684, 4 dcTofopLos — ‘what is worn underneath’ cf. MG acofopi ‘undergarment’; d^op/xdptos* is a new 
word in SB iii, 7168, 4 — ‘one who attempts evasion’ cf. d<f>oppapT]s (— -ts) in medieval Greek; cVatpco 
PKF 27, 3 has the modern sense ‘I take’; mo-aoj/xeVa BL l, 433 [— P. Bas. 19, l, 5] is not from maaoo} 
but — n7](ja6vcp,a ‘nails’ as in MG; in SB i, 4755, 6; 19 an adverb irpouKoXXa occurs = ‘close to, hard 
by ’ which should replace irpoaKoWaros in Preisigke’s lexicon. Enough has been quoted to show the value 
of Kapsomenakis’s approach to the linguistic problems of the papyri. Apart from this the author makes a 
number of ingenious corrections to various papyri and supports them by copious linguistic observ^ations 
collected from the post-Christian papyri. Of particular value to the papyrologist are his observations on 
orthography: apfipoXeavai in PSl \iu, 901, 13 and dpi<l>i^oX€vov<ji ibid. 1 . 22 are interpreted as 
and this is confirmed by numerous examples of euov = €v and avov — au; in P. Giss, ii, 8/9 e7recrraA{')yv} 
/xeVo? is convincingly explained as iTreardXrjv. pLovos, for the interchange of e and o is a common pheno- 
menon in these texts. The interchange of e and a likewise frequently obscures interpretation : the mysterious 
yap yevas of P. Flor. II, 175, 32 turns out to be no more than crapydvav; here belongs, too, the frequent 
appearance of the particle dv as ev, in the light of which d evScuo-t aot /cep/xa P. Flor. li, 274, 7/8 is 
seen to be 6 Iv (=d;/) hcLar); this makes attractive K.’s suggestion that ov evSo/ct/xdo*^? in P. Thead. 19, 
ly =2= ov cv hoKLfjidar]£y w^hich is better syntax and rids the dictionaries of a ghost-word ei 58 oKtpd^a>. 

There are a number of points where the author has carried ingenuity beyond the bounds of probability. 
In P. Fay. 114, 17/22 for rrjv ecKSvlv 7 tI{jluls rfj kS et k€ K. wishes to read et/ce = ‘come’ with a stop 
after k 8. This is hardly plausible in view of the similar expression in P. Fay. 113, 12: /cat rfj itj et lO rfj 
TToXei TrejLtcn? et/cdda?, which the author dismisses in a foot-note. This leads K. to suggest that d/crti/ay/xos* 
and ibid. 1 . 22 means ‘departure*. In support of this interpretation he quotes Hesychius e/crtvd^af diroKivijaai 
and Suidas aTTOKiveiv’ to aTrepxcc^Oat. But it is the practice of lexicographers to explain unusual usages 
by the Attic equivalent. Consequently c/crtvd^at in Hesychius must be understood as transitive and it is 
quite inadmissible to fuse the two authorities to produce evidence that c/cTtvdfat = rd dTTcpx^oSai. Nor 
am I convinced by K.’s interpretation of c/crtvay/xd? in P. Flor. il, 209, 13 and rtvay/xds* in Flor. 246*, 3/6 
and ibid. 196, 2/ 10. /X17 vTrrjpeaOfj 6 e/crtvaypds* in the first pap. is equivalent to Iva prj 6 rtvay/xds ipnohlaOr) 
in the second and it is fairly clear that the w'ine in question is meant as payment for the (olive) harvest. 
The fact that iKTivayfios is used in one case and nvayfios in the other is of no great moment and to 
insist on it smacks of special pleading. It hardly warrants our isolating this one usage of cKrtvaypos* from 
the whole family of rLvdaaco words and basing our explanation on an ambiguous gloss of Hesychius. 

In the Silko inscription the notorious iftXovLKrjaovmv is explained as — i<l>LXovLfcq(Ta(nv where the 
ending of the future has intruded into the aorist. Despite the undoubted interaction of these two tenses in 
post-classical times, it is difficult to find parallels for the ending -ovm in the aorist indicative, K.’s attempt 
to interpret P. Lond. 1916 (— Bell, Jews and Christians) is hardly convincing and to insist that in redcX'^KovaL 
P. Amh. II, 130 we have the future ending and not the present, is quite arbitrary. It is significant, however, 
that the above form and the TTapair^aovaiv of P. Lond. 1916, 29 both occur after Does then 

ifiXoviK'^cTQvoL stand for (fuXovifdjcrajcrLv} K. himself (p. 102) quotes many examples of the introduction 
of indicative endings into the subjunctive, and the intrusion of the augment into non-indicative moods is 
a well-attested phenomenon, as is the omission of dv and the interchange of subjunctive and optative in 
frequentative clauses: cTretS^ ifiXoviKi^aovai stands then for the classical €7T€t8^ (fycXovciKijaeiav. 

On p. 100 f. K. enumerates examples of the coalescence of similar vowels such as vyij for vyiij etc., and 
apropos of this he criticizes my remarks {J. Theol. Stud., 1934, 171 f.) on idv 8er, which he regards as an 
example of idv with the indicative in conditional clauses. It is not to be denied that the indicative often 
appears in such constructions, but that is not the point which I was stressing in the above article. What I 
w ished to make clear in this paper is that orthographical variants such as riOeiKa and riOyjKa should not 
be treated as significant linguistic facts once the equivalence of tj and €i has been established. Similarly if 



€av Sec occurs in a papyrus, it is an arbitrary procedure to print ed^ Sec and catalogue this as an example 
of eay with the indicative, for it may equally well be edv Set — Seij, This is borne out by K.’s own remarks, 
for he notes that *AA 0 e€t (dative of AAOacev^) also appears as AXOec (‘oder ^A^et zu lesen*!). This is 
precisely parallel to Set. May we not say with equal truth ‘Set oder Set zu lesen’ ? Consequently this parti- 
cular example cannot be regarded as unambiguous evidence for the use of the indicative in conditional 

It is difficult to understand what the author means by the ‘Angleichung der Endungen des Konjunktivs 
an die des Indikativs' (p. 102^); tva yeverac etc. are possibly examples of the substitution of the indicative 
for the subjunctive. On the other hand in cases like Iva aveXOovoi P. Flor. il, 175, 27/9 and elva fxoc fjcaprv- 
pT](Tov(nv P. Oxy. VII, 1068, 19 there are two possible explanations: (i) that we have a substitution of the 
future indicative for the aorist subjunctive (a common phenomenon), or (2) that -ovac is an orthographic 
variant for -ajm. In most examples of this interchange of ov and cd it is possible to adopt a morphological 
or syntactical explanation: eV T^pcoacov KaraKeyo^p^f^pcevov BGU 71, 23 may be regarded as a genitive 
construction (though this is more difficult in examples like ev rfj EoKvoTraiov vi](jov CPR iv, 8 (i) and ev 
Tip enoLKiov P. Lond. 232, 2). In eSe^ov BGU 984, 9 (iv), aTreypdilsov P. Oxy. 1157, 25 (iii) etc., again, the 
-ov may be an intrusion from the strong aorist ; but a certain example of ov for <o is to be found in P. Oxy, 
36, ix, II (iii/iv) where the editors read okktov for o/ctcj, and peaXXovTos = pLaXkwros in P. Masp. 6, ii, 
65 (vi). The second of the above explanations is, therefore, not to be dismissed, but until further statistics 
are available for the interchangeability of ov and co in the papyri, the first explanation is to be preferred. 
There can, however, be no question of the ‘assimilation of the endings of the subjunctive to those of the 

I cannot agree, further, that elSores^ dTreXOojra etc., are necessarily instances where perfect 

endings have been introduced into the aorist. v is a notoriously unstable sound in Greek and its omission 
is frequent. Mayser i, 191 quotes dvevevKdrcjv, rovs ypdifjaras, ores = omes etc. The above forms are, 
therefore, nothing more than orthographical errors. Through a similar misapprehension the editors 
of P. Oxy. XVI have inserted a new word KarapacvwTos in the index. The text (1978, 4, 8) reads KarapaevivTa 
dno dxd7]Sy which is, of course, no more than Kara^aevovra. . . . 

This review, however, would convey a false impression if I allowed it to end on a note of criticism. The 
book, despite its small compass, is one of the most valuable contributions to the language of the post- 
Christian papyri that has yet appeared. 

L. R. Palmer 

Bibliothecae Apostolicae Vaticanae . . . Codices Copt id y Tomus i: Codices Coptic! Vatican!. Recensuerunt 
Ad. Hebbelynck^ et Arn. van Lantschoot. In Bibliotheca Vaticana, mcmxxxvii. Pp. xxix+698. 

This review is unpardonably belated, yet it is still, so far as I know, the first to appear in this country. 
The book, upon which the late Mgr. Hebbelynck and Fr. van Lantschoot spent many years of labour, 
will be a landmark in Coptic studies, as was its great predecessor, Zoega’s catalogue, over a hundred 
years ago, though in the present volume only the Bohairic manuscripts come under consideration. An 
immense amount of minute and invaluable information relating to the manuscripts is given us. The 
space devoted to the liturgical books far exceeds indeed that allotted to the remainder (cf. PraefatiOy p. i); 
but seeing that most of these others have by now been published — in many cases more than once and by 
editors of varying quality — Coptic scholars have no reason to complain. Being no liturgiologist, I have 
paid attention chiefly to the descriptions of the famous series of parchment volumes, brought from Nitria, 
more than two centuries ago, by J. S. Assemani. Until their arrival the Coptic manuscripts in the papal 
libraries had been insignificant: the Inventory of 1481 shows merely a few service books, of which the 
librarian of that day could make little. He found them described as littera cegyptia caphitu {cophyto), 
cum glossa arabica ; but he says they are written in Greek characters, intermixed with chaldece litter ce (pre- 
sumably the 6 Coptic letters) and adds puto linguam esse monachorum cegyptiorum. The acquisition of the 
14 Nitrian volumes (here Nos. i, 5, 35, 57-69) gave to the Vatican collection the first place in Europe; 
what was previously to be found in other libraries consisted, as here, of relatively modem liturgical manu- 
scripts. Assemani introduced the learned world to Coptic ‘literature’. The very varied contents of these 
volumes had been long since described or listed: by Assemani himself, by Quatremere — after Bonaparte 



had carried them off to Paris — and by Zoega, though he knew only Tuki’s unreliable copies. The present 
work, following the lines laid down in Hebbelynck’s Inventaire Sommaire (in the Ehrle Miscellaneay 1924), 
gives us the title of each piece (of which in some volumes there are more than a dozen, in others only three), 
with incipit and explicit, the indication of the Greek original where identified — a most welcome feature — 
bibliography of text and related publications, besides a quantity of facts as to script, make-up of the volumes, 
and so forth. Of the texts themselves much has already been written ; they comprise, besides two biblical 
volumes (Nos. i and 5), martyrdoms, encomiums, lives, a few apocryphal texts, and a number of homilies — 
among these the finest manuscript of all, No. 57, consisting of 38 unpublished discourses of Chrysostom. 
Incidental names and places have been discussed elsewhere,^ though plenty remains to be said about 
many of them. Of the biblical manuscripts one is the beautiful, still unused Pentateuch, the text whereof 
will prove disappointing, owing to its many omissions and inaccuracies; the other a thirteenth- century 
Psalter, likewise ignored hitherto by editors. But Assemani had overlooked (or despised ?) the many stray 
leaves that lay neglected in the monasteries and after him Curzon, Tattam, Tischendorf, and finally Evelyn 
White succeeded in bringing away a considerable number, which eventually found homes in London,^ 
Manchester, Leipzig, and Old Cairo respectively. 

It may be said that, liturgical texts apart, Bohairic literature is in origin Nitrian literature. Service 
books of various types have indeed come from these monasteries, but written only in later ages and — 
with the exception of No. 35 here — upon paper. It is true that the books we are at present concerned 
with, homilies as well as martyrdoms and lives, are properly speaking liturgical in purpose ; for all belonged 
to the Synaxarium (as Zoega was the first to recognize), to be read, as the rubrics show, throughout the 
year, and in the Assemani series all months are represented, most frequently Pachon and Epep ; whereas 
the homilies seem mostly to be proper to Lent. It has been assumed that these manuscripts, dateable 
almost all in the ninth and tenth centuries, were collected to reconstitute an earlier library, which had 
perished in the last of the destructive raids upon the monasteries.^ Whence did they come? Certain 
pieces were written actually in the Macarian monastery; ten at least for that community. 

Of the many scribes employed one, Chael, son of Matoi, is conspicuously diligent : there are 22 speci- 
mens here of his hand — some 325 folios in all — and more in other collections. No other hand recurs more 
than eight times. But, besides the scribes, many users of the books have immortalized themselves : readers 
who often name their place of origin — kat*. ToynATpic, pp. 439, 484, &c. — and thus raise questions as to 
where the volumes had been, before being deposited in Nitria. For, besides the above-named Chael, 
himself from T|xico‘\i-Dakahlah, these readers seem mostly to be natives of the eastern or north-eastern 
Delta and there is not evidence to show whether they had handled the books in those districts, or w^ere 
monks (possibly pilgrims), who found them already in the Nitrian libraries. The towns they speak of are 
in or near to those parts where once the Bushmuric dialect could be heard and one might be tempted to 
see, in certain features of the idiom noticeable in these readers’ conscribillationes, traces of that extinct (?) 
speech.^ However, comparison with the usage of the scribes themselves shows that few, if any, of the 
readers’ peculiarities but may be found there likewise and unless the Nitrian idiom were to be regarded 
as an import from across the Delta, they seem more plausibly to be explained as mere illiterate aberrations 
within the normal ‘Bohairic’ dialect, when written by natives of the eastern provinces. Examples of such 
abnormality are the frequent use of absolute for construct verbal forms; of initial eii- for u-, of for oy, 
‘A. for T and vice versa, ^ for q (rarely), uj for ^ (ditto) ; the dropping of initial, final, and even medial syllables 
and conspicuously of initial u- in the subjunctive (Te-,TA-, vea-, veq-, Toy-^); frequent metathesis of 

* The former in PSBA xxix, 289, 301 > the latter also there and of course in Amelineau’s Geographic, 

^ Presumably the parchment leaves in the British Museum are, almost all, Nitrian (v. my CataL p. xvii n.). 
One or two belong in fact to Vatican volumes and that is the case with some in the three other collections also. 

3 Beginning of ninth century ; v. Evelyn White, New Texts, p. xxxii. 

^ That is, ten of a round hundred which the volumes comprise. Those showing scribe’s colophons will 
have been the last in the respective volume, as originally constituted. 

5 On this dialect, its home and sur\dval, cf. Proc, Brit. Acad. 1939, 249 ff. 

^ I have noted the following occurrences in Nitrian texts of another Toy-, as ist pres, prefix: MG 25, 127 
TTiCA-si ToyctoTejuL AH (and thrice more there). Cat. 34 ic-xe TOYcefei, C 86, 239 ic 7 npojuini Toyep 
fcACAHi’^m, EW 12 IC Toy^eepetop. Also in *S: JA ’88, 369 e^ome Ayp nopitiA . . , Toyo npjutoe (cf. 371 



consonants. It is not surprising to meet occasionally with Fayyumic-speaking readers: pp. 484 /«/., 496, 
510 (the well-known long colophon), 518, but there is no taint of Fayyumic influence in the texts them- 
selves, though often enough of Sa<idic,^ from which dialect most at any rate of them are admittedly adapted.^ 
And besides these extraneous dialects there are the specimens of that remarkable Graeco-Coptic script 
(if not idiom), lately described elsewhere pp. 410, 412, 427, 446. 

These readers' notes preserve many a strange name, not hitherto recorded. The long family memorial, 
for instance (p. 473), appended to No. 65 — a volume presented to a village church probably in the eastern 
Delta — has eighteen, some of them of decidedly un-Egyptian aspect : among the men eto^ and (van 

p.470 enetoig), among women ceAxicni, ^iiewuLcp (doubtful), ^ It may 

be noted here that in another Nitrian colophon (Leipzig Tischendorf xxiv, 31) we find julhiia ihc (Jesus),^ 
the donor's father, and his mother, natives of tihi jul[. djutoycH, both names and place otherwise 

unknown. Many others might be cited, but they will no doubt all be recorded in the promised second 
volume of Fr. van Lantschoot’s Recueil des ColophoTis, 

Some of the incidental place-names too appear here for the first time, or in improved readings. But 
does not ’•^'xec^pone (p. 456) look better as read in C 86 269 ^-xe^^po n€i6[HT, even if the second word be 
questionable?^ On p. 467 is a place, Ujlj, near Damietta (Ibn Dukmak 5, 78). On p. 519 vepnonT 

is scarcely to be identified. The word is presumably the same as in T€?y.TionTOYpu) (Evelyn White 94, 95) 
and Tc'XfcoiiT-TeA/Soii/^ty (Kr 133). But these are in Upper Egypt, whereas in the Delta a placeTalbant occurs 
thrice (Boinet 515). On p. 473 I would propose tajuloy[‘\j iieiefiiT, comparing mgopjuiec t., itself near 
Damietta, with which this manuscript is connected. There are of course plenty of Arabic- written place- 
names in the subscriptions to the liturgical books, some easily located, others elusive. I will mention only 
one — and that perhaps no place at all — leaving others to explain it. As title to the lessons for the feast of 
John the Baptist (p. 562) we read of- j jlr 

Finally a few emendations and additions may be suggested to a work whose completeness and minute 
accuracy are among its conspicuous virtues. P. 13 read H. G. Evelyn White. — P. 22 inf. and elsewhere, 
why basnas, rather than basansl — P. 140 for barmahdt read barmudah and below, before "die 8 \ insert 
epep. — P. 383, 5 read p. 326. — P. 386 perhaps lu-stin (..-.^) noyiioT and below Orientalistische. — P. 390, 8 
— P. 395, 3 read P.G. 89. — P. 399, 9 read n. 51. — P. 435 ult.y Armenian version transl. Conybeare 
in Am. J. TheoL 1905, 719. — P. 448 Martyrianus ed. Chaine in ROC xxvti, 140. — P. 452 inf. Rylands 438. — 
P. 456, 8 from below, eTd.yci(iti). — P. 471 re-edited C 86, 90 ff. — P. 482 med.y ? ATToq\Vio'yjuL€ii (-ixeA, 
Cairo 8025). — P. 510 re-edited I. Guidiin ALR 1906,472. — P. 513 Greek in P.G. 60, 765 (De Vis). — P, 518, 
12 from below, jutHne..— P. 646, 10 from below, 

W. E. Crum 

ceo np.), Sphinx 10, 3 iiecnHy irpocKYuei . . . ToyAtAKg ; and in F: MR 5,33 TOYe‘\ iipocKY(ni). 

This appears to stand to ce- as subjunct. B nToy- to nee-, the former of which (nvoy-) is met with here 
and there in S also: LAp 528, GuDorm 345, Balestri p. xliii. 

J Cf. Lefort in MuseoHy XLiv, 123 ff. 

2 The lives even of the Nitrian saints were written in Safidic ; cf. Ryl. 95 (Macarius), Morgan 40 (Maximus 
and Dometius). ^ Proc. Brit. Ac., ut supra. 

^ More like a place, but for preceding ‘and\ 

5 This curious text has suffered, the editors tell us, from the attentions of rash restorers. Unfortunately 
a photograph is not given by Hyvemat. 

® The Syrian type in -isho^, or the Ethiopic in -iyasus cannot be compared, since the first element in these 
is always a verb or noun, not another proper name. 

7 Cf. ? L-r (Boinet 156). 




Tut<ankhamCts:’s Gold Dagger 

Plate I Tut^ankhamun’s Gold Dagger ........ Frontispiece 

Some Rubbings of Egyptian Monuments made a Hundred Years ago 

Plate II Stela of the Metal-Engraver Tunennehebkhons, from a rubbing by John 

Williams ............ facing p, 8 

Plate III I. Stela of Amennakhte, Scribe of the Place of Truth 

2. Back and Sides of a Statuette formerly in the Lee Collection, from rubbings 

by John Williams .......... ,, lo 

Egyptian Military Standards 

Plate IV Egyptian Military Standards . . - . . . . . . t5 

Plate V Egyptian Military Standards . . . - . . , . . ,, i6 

Plate VI Egyptian Military Standards . . . . . . . . . ,,17 

Ramesside Texts relating to the Taxation and Transport of Corn 

Plate VII The Amiens Papyrus, recto y pp. 1 and 5. . . . . . . ,, 37 

Plate VIII The Griffith Fragments, penultimate column . . . . . . ,,69 

A Tax- Assessor’s Journal of the Middle Kingdom 

Plates IX and IXa P. Harageh 3 ....... . between pp, and 77 

The Stela of Shoshenk, Great Chief of the Meshwtsh 

Plate X The Stela of Shoshenk, Great Chief of the Meshwesh, 11 . i-io. ,, 82 and 83 

Plate Xa The Stela of Shoshenk, Great Chief of the Meshwesh, notes on 

11. i-io .......... ,,82 and 83 

Plate XI The Stela of Shoshenk, Great Chief of the Meshwesh, 11 . 10-19. »> 82 and 83 

Plate XI a The Stela of Shoshenk, Great Chief of the Meshwesh, notes on 

11. 10-19 ......... ,,82 atid 83 

Plate XII The Stela of Shoshenk, Great Chief of the Meshwesh, 11 . 19-26. ,, 82 and 83 

Plate XI I a The Stela of Shoshenk, Great Chief of the Meshwesh, notes on 

11. 19-26 .......... ,,82 and 83 

Syrians in the Tomb of Amunedjeh 

Plate XIII Syrians from the Tomb of Amunedjeh. Thebes, tomb No. 84 . ,, 98 and 99 

The Tunic of Tut«ankhamun 

Plate XIV The Tunic of Tut^ankhamun ....... . facing p. 113 

Plate XV Woven Bands from the Tunic . . . . . . . . ,,116 

Plate XVI Textiles from the Tomb of Tut^ankhamun. Drafts and Designs . . ,, 118 

Plate XVII The Tunic of Tut<ankhamun. Back. Side Border . . . . . ,,119 

Plate XVIII The Tunic of Tut^ankhamun. Front. Decoration of the Neck Opening . ,,120 

Plate XIX Textile 1045 from the Tomb of Tut^ankhamun . . . . . ,,121 

Plate XX The Tunic of Tut^ankhamun. Front. (Top) Key to the Panels . between pp, 126 and 127 

(Below) Embroidered Panels 1-9 

Plate XXI The Tunic of Tut<ankhamun. Front. The Embroidered Panels 10-12 and 

Side Borders facing p. 127 

Plate XXII The Tunic of Tut<ankhamun, Back. (Top) Key to the Panels, between pp, 130 and 13 1 

(Below) The Embroidered Panels 



A Tax- Assessor’s Journal of the Middle Kingdom 

Fig. I 

The Tunic of Tut<ankhamun 

Fig. I. Key to the Position of the Bands ........ 

The Hieroglyph for the Fledgling 

Fig. I 

Fig. 2 

Fig. 3 



• 115 






Abydos, 84 ff. 

Adulis, town, 141. 

^Agni, town, 24 ff. 

^Ahhotpe, queen, 43, 45. 

Akhamenkanekht, page, 84; 89, n, 42. 

^Akhpe, scribe, 63, 64. 

Akhptahkanekht, Syrian foreigner, 84; 89, n. 42. 
Akhtoy, scribe, 2. 

Akitesub, ship’s captain, 57. 

Alexander, elephant-hunter, 141. 

Amen-Re^, standard of, 17; oracle of, 92. 
Amenemone, prophet, 29. 

Amenhima^u, father of Peieroy, 39. 

Amenhotpe, retainer, 40 ; overseer of cattle, 52 ; ship’s 
captain, 57; father of Akitesub, 57; of Mahu, 
57 ' 

Amenmose, cultivator, 57. 

Amennakhte, stela of, 9. 

Amentefnakhte, chief of the king’s bodyguard, 165. 
Ameny, stela of, 10. 

Amherst collection, 9 ff. 

Ammenemes I, 2 ff. 

Ammenemes II, 5. 

Amun, creator of new land, 48. 

Amunedjeh, tomb of, 96 ff. 

^Anefsu, foreigner, 36. 

LAnere, controller, 38, 39. 

LAnkhatir, policeman, 24, 26, 28. 

^Antimose, scribe, 53, 55, 56. 

Anubis in htp-di~nsw formula, 80. 

Aquarius, 150, 15 1. 

Argo, 15 1. 

Aries, 15 1. 

Arkell, a. J., The Name of Sesebi, 159. 

^Ashafe (<'/ sfyt)^ epithet of Amun, 45, 46. 
LAshafeheryeb, cultivator, 39; controller, 40. 
^Ashafemhab, ship’s captain, 39. 

^Ashafenakhte, father of Wennofrenakhte, 39; of 
Psmennakhte, 40. 

^Ashafeyew, ship’s captain, 37. 

Astronomy, 149 ff. 

Attempted Sacrifice of Sesostris, The, G. A. Wain- 
WRIGHT, 138-43. 

^Autiroy, foreigner, 37. 


Barley, 24, n. 3 ; 27, 28 ; black ink used for amounts in, 

Bass, H. G. M., Review by, 176. 

Bataille a., and others. Publications de la Societe 
Fouad I de Papyrologie. Textes et Documents 
III. Les Papyrus Fouad 7 , Nos. i- 8 g (re- 
viewed), 176-7. I 

Batn el-Bakarah, *The Cow’s Belly’, name of apex of 
Delta, 158. 

Bekamun, father of Mins^ankh, 38. 

Bekenbi, mother of cultivator Huy, 59. 


I Bekenkhons, 53; father of ^Ashafeyew, 37. 

Bell, H. I.. Review by, 174-6. 

Bennett, C. J. C., Growth of the Htp-Di-Nsw 
formula in the Middle Kingdom, 77-82. 

The Writing of Htp-Di-Nsw, 157. 

Bibliography: Graeco-Roman Egypt, Greek Inscrip- 
tions (1939-40), Marcus N, Tod, 153-6. 

Big Game Hunters in Ptolemaic and Roman Libya, 
Marcus N. Tod, 159-60. 

Blackman, A. M., The Stela of Shoshenk, Great 
Chief of the Meshwesh, 83-95. 

Blinding of Truth, Story of the, 158, 159. 

Bondman, value of a, 90, n. 58; 91, n. 61. 
Bupuamenkha^i, bondman, 85; 90, n, 55. 

Butehamun, cultivator, 30. 


Cairo Stela d' entree 66285, 83 ff. 

Capricornus, 150. 

Cassiopeia, 149, 15 1. 

Cerny, Jaroslav, 'Inn in Late Egyptian, 106-12. 
Charimortos, elephant-hunter, 141. 

Chatley, Dr., Letter on Egyptian Astronomy from, 
15 1-2. 

Chevron decoration, 124, 125. 

Chief workman, title, 48. 

Coinage of Egypt, 135 ff., 161, 177. 

Coma Berenices, 150. 

Controller, agricultural title, 48. 

Com, taxation and transport of, 19 ff., 74 ff. 

Corona australis, 15 1; borealis, 15 1. 

Cow’s Belly, The, Alan H. Gardiner, 158. 
Criminals employed on land, 46. 

Crowfoot, G. M. and N. de G. Davies, The Tunic 
of Tut^ankhamun, 113-30. 

Crum, W. E., Review by, 179—81. 

Cultivator, title, 21, 22, 48. 


Dagger, gold, of Tut^ankhamun, i. 

Davies, N. de G. (with G. M. Crowfoot), The 
Tunic of Tut<ankhamun, 113—30. 

Davies, Nina M., The Hieroglyph for the Fledgling, 
i33~4J N. de G., Syrians in the Tomb of 
Amunedjeh, 96-8. 

Decans, 151, 152. 

Decorated royal garments, 1 1 3 ff. 

Denitenhor, bondman, 85 ; 90, n. 57. 

Dhutemhab, chief of the ergastulum, 32. 

Dhutmose, scribe of the Necropolis, 22 ff. ; janitor, 
23 ff. 

Dhutweshbi, ship’s captain, 30 ff. 

Diodorus, 138 ff. 

Divine Adoratress, House of the, 69. 

Dja^-ruhe, town, 45. 

Dodd, antiquity dealer, 10. 

Durah, 28, n. 4. 



1 86 


Efenennebu, cultivator, 52. 

Efnamun, scribe of the Necropolis, 23. 

Egyptian Astronomy, Letters from Dr. Eisler and 
Dr. Chatley, 149-52. 

Egyptian Military Standards, R. O. Faulkner, 12-18. 
Egyptian Sea-going Ships: A Correction, R. O. 

Faulkner, 158, 

E^howtenufe, foreigner, 36, 37, 

Eisler, Dr., Letter on Egyptian Astronomy from, 


Elephant-hunting, 141, i6o. 

Embroidery, 115 ff. 

Endowments of statues of Nemrat, 93, 94. 
Enduring-of- Kingship, a locality near Abydos, 90, 
n. 48. 

Engberg, Robert M., The Hyksos Reconsidered (re- 
viewed), 171. 

Ere^o, priest, 56. 

Emutet, wife of Yuny, 10. 

Eroy, foreigner, 34 ff. 

Eumedes, elephant-hunter, 141. 


Farmer, value of a, 90, n. 58. 

Faulkner, R. O., Egyptian Military Standards, 12--1 8. 
Egyptian Sea-going Ships: A Correction, 158. 
Reviews by, 166-71. 


Gardiner, Alan H., Ramesside Texts relating to the 
Transport and Taxation of Com, 19-73. 
Tut^ankhamun's Gold Dagger, i. 

Postscript to Cerny, J., Tnn in Late Egyptian, 

II 2 . 

The Cow's Belly, 158. 

Review by, 173. 

Gebelen, Egn. Imiotru, town, 24 ff. ; writing of, 36, 
n. 4. 

Golenischeff, Wladimir, Prof., death of, 165. 

Great God, the, divine title, 79; 166, 167. 

Greek Epigram from Egypt, A, Marcus N. Tod, 

Griffith papyms fragments on corn-taxation, 64 ff. 
Growth of the Htp-Di-Nsw formula in the Middle | 
Kingdom, C. J. C. Bennett, 77-82. 

Gryphon as decorative motif y 129. 

Gunn, Battiscombe, Notes on Ammenemes I, 2-6. 
Notes on Egyptian Lexicography, 144-8. 

The Use of Red for Amounts of Cereals in Hiera- 
tic, 157. 


Hadnakhtu, father of Neb^an, 40. 

Harmin, scribe, 59. 

Harmose, gardener, 85. 

Hamakhte, royal scribe, 63. 

Harresnet, master of the mysteries of the God's 
mother, 10. 

Harsiese, father of Psherinmut, 85. 

Hathor, w^orshipped at ^Agni, 25, n. 6; at Pathyris, 
36; invoked in htp--di-nsw formula, 80; the 
Seven Hathors, 132. 

Hatiay, stable-master, 59. 

Hatshepsut, queen, 13, 16. 

He-e-pwoid, town, /t4> 45- 
He-kak, town, 67, 68. 

He-were, town, 53, n.3; 55, n. 3. 

Hebbelynck, Ad. and Arn. van Lantschoot, Biblio^ 
thecae Apostolicae Vaticanae . . . Codices Coptici, 
Tomus I (reviewed), 179-81. 

Heichelheim, F. M., On Medlnet Habu Ostracon 
4038, 161. 

Reviews by, 176-7. 

Hentowe, female musician of Amun, 25 ff. 
Heracleopolis, seat of Shoshenk family, 92. 

Herihor, viceroy of Cush, 23, n. 2. 

Herodotus, 138 ff. 

Heryebhima^e, sandal-maker, 52, 53. 

Hewnufe, ship's captain, 57. 

Hieroglyph for the Fledgling, The, Nina M. Davies, 

Hippopotamus, 142. 

Hita, ship's captain, 57. 

Hkty var. Hkfyty goddess of He-were, 53, n. 3; 55, 
n. 3 ; invoked in htp'-di-nsxjo formula, 80. 

Hnty Imntyw in htp-di-nsw formula, 78. 

Hori, prophet, 40 ; controller, 45, 53 ; steward's envoy, 
74> 75- 

House of the Morning {pr^-dwH) used for rite of Open- 
ing the Mouth, 88, n. 35. 

Hrainufe, master of the Portable Shrine, 29. 
Htp-di-nsw formula, 77 ff., 157, 166. 

Huy, cultivator, 59; the black, 57; father of soldier 
Setmose, 71. 

Hyksos, 171. 


Ibi, holder of surveying cords, 74, 75. 

Imiotru, see Gebelen. 

Imouthes, god, 2. 

Incubation in temples, 3, n. i. 

Indigo as dye, ii6, n. 2. 

In . . . imakh, mother of Tediese, 85; 91, n. 67. 
Inmut, two towns so named, 45, n. 4; 66. 

Instruction of Ammenemes I, 2 ff. 

Irbak, bondman, 85 ; 90, n. 54. 

Irushare', mason, 29, 30. 

Island of Amun Overrunning-his-boundary, t^vo 
localities so named, 45, n. 4. 

Island of Khons, three localities so named, 48, n. 5. 
lune, foreigner, 33, 


Junker, Hermann, Gtza II and Giza III (reviewed), 


I^adore, fisherman, 30, 31. 

Kaemmedu, O.K. official, 10. 

Kapsomenakis, S. G., Voruntersuchungen zu einer 
Grammatik der Papyri der nachchristlichen Zeit 
(reviewed), 177-9. 

Katja, foreigner, 37. 

Ken(?), prophet, 52. 

Keson, priest, 38, 39. 

Kha^emtir, foreigner, 36. 

Khaffiap, coffin of, lo, ii. 

Khantkhem, god, 167. 

Kharoy, fisherman, 32; Sherden, 54. 
Khensehenutenib, scribe, 70. 

Khensemhab, ship's captain, 40. 

Khensmose, janitor, 23 ff.; cultivator, 32. 



Khmun, town, 52, 

Khnemnakhte, ship^s captain, 61, 62. 

Khnum, god, 31; 53, n. 3; invoked in htp^dunsw 
formula, 80. 

Krur, builder, 29. 


Lady of the two egg-shells, epithet of Hathor, 36. 
Langton, N. and B., The Cat in Ancient Egypt (re- 
viewed), 173. 

Leather net worn by marines, 14. 

Lee collection, 8 ff. 

Leon, elephant-hunter, 141. 

Lichas, elephant-hunter, 14 1. 

Looms for weaving, 1 24. 

Louvre leather fragments on corn- taxation, 70 ff* 
Love charm, 131, 132. 


Madder as dye, 116, n. 2; 123. 

Mahu, cultivator, 57. 

Maiu (?), House of, 32. 

Manetho, 138, 139. 

Marrui, foreigner, 35. 

Medlnet Habu Ostracon 4038, On, F. M. Heichel- 
HEIM, 161. 

Mehetemweskhet, mother of Nemrat, 84 fF, ; 88, n. 21. 
Mehharenpaireref, father of Nemeriu, 85; 91, n. 65. 
Menna, carpenter, ii. 

Mensneu, stable-master, 50. 

Mentehetef, deputy-commander of the army, 63. 
Menthikhopshef, deputy superintendent, 63. 
Menuthias, town, 142. 

Merenptah, king, 62. 

Mery, high-priest of Amun, 96, n. 2, 

Metri, unknown locality, 63. 

MiijsE, J. G., The Tukh el-]Karamus Gold Hoard, 
^ 35 - 7 - 

Mins^ankh, commander of ships, 38. 

Mi^o, herdsman, 32. 

Mock King, 139. 

Mont, House of, 29, 30, 33. 

Mosh^enufe, female musician of Amun, 29. 

Moss, Rosalind, Some Rubbings of Egyptian Monu- 
ments made a Hundred Years ago, 7-11. 
Mound of Nahihu, two localities so named, 45, n. 4; 
59, n. 5. 


(Nakht?)amun, cultivator, 30. 

Nakhtmin, father of Hatiay, 59. 

Nanay, stela of, 10. 

Nashenumeh, bondman, 85 ; 90, n. 56. 

Nauruz, festival of, 139, 140, 143. 
Nay-Ra'messe-miamun, town, 55, n. 2. 
Nay-Usima're^-miamun, town, 54, 55. 
Nay-Usima're'-setpenre«, town, 55. 

Nebamun, standard-bearer, 15, 16. 

Neb<an, ship^s captain, 40; father of Khensemhab, 

Nebhotep, goddess, 58, n. 2. 

Nebnufe, cultivator, 57. 

Nebthepet, father of Tediese, 85. 

Nebtu (Nebu), goddess, 31. 

Nebuchadnezzar, inscription of, at East India House, 

9, ii‘ 

Nebw'<ot, cultivator, 59. 

Necropolis administration in Medlnet Habu, 25. 
Neferebre^makhet, statue of, ii. 

Neferhotep, stela of, lo; stable-master, 22; father of 
ship's captain Amenhotpe, 57. 

Neferronpe, king's scribe, 63 ; father of ^Ashafemhab, 
39; of soldier Pentwere, 71. 

Nefrusi, town, 52, n. 4: 53, n. 3; 54, 55, 59. 
Nekhemut, controller, 55. 

Nemeriu, weaver (?), 85; 91, n. 64. 

Nemrat, great chief of the Meshwesh, 84 ff. 
Nesamenope, scribe, 25 ff. 

Nesamun, accountant, 29 ff, ; chief of police, 32, 33 ; 
foreigner, 35 ; prophet, 35 ; scribe, 56; without 
title, 38. 

Nesdhowt, scribe, 55. 

Nestatayt, weaver (?), 85. 

Nimu, town, = Npiimu, 33. 

Nofretiri, queen, 41, 43, 45. 

Northern Loam, the, place-name, 24, 26. 

Notation of corn-measures, 28. 

Notes on Ammen ernes I, Battiscombe Gunn, 2-6. 
Notes on Egyptian Lexicography, Battiscombe 
Guntst, 144-8. 

Npiimu, town, 32 ff. 


Oracle of Amen-Re<, 92. 

Orion, 15 1. 

Osiris, in htp-^dUnsw formula, 78 ff. ; threats against, 

Osymandyas, 138, n. i. 

Ox, value of an, 90, n. 59. 


P. Amiens, 37 ff. 

P. Brit. Mus. 10447, 58 ff. 

P. Harageh 3, 74 ff. 

P, Harris, 72, 73. 

P. Louvre 3171, 56 ff. 

P. Sallier IV, versOy 62 ff. 

P. Turin 1887, 60 ff.; 1895 -h 2006, 22, 

Paentyney, clerk of the tenuty 75. 

Palmer, L. R., Review by, 177-9. 

Pahnette as decorative motif , 127, 128. 

P^amtope, scribe, 52, 54. 

P<an, deputy, 56. 

P^ankha^, prophet, 37. 

Parkep, sarcophagus of, 10. 

P^ashpu, town, 59. 

Payeamun, town, 158. 

Pay«onkh, viceroy of Cush, 23, nn. 2, 3. 

Pbeki, cultivator, 25, 26. 

Peel, steward, 43. 

Peieroy, cultivator, 39. 

Pen<anuke, father of Rome, 62. 

Pendhowt, foreigner, 35. 

Penehsy, see Penhasi. 

Penemute, foreigner, 36. 

Penhasi, viceroy of Cush, 23; foreigner, 29, 36; 
temple-scribe, 30, 37; herdsman, 32, 33; father 
of Tepteramun, 85. 

Penmenkh, father of Harmose, 85 ; 91, n. 62. 
Pennestowe, controller, 40; scribe, 52 ff. 

Penroy, scribe, 57. 

Penthdres, foreigner, 35 ff. 

Pentwere, controller, 39; cultivator, 40; soldier, 71; 
father of Phesy, 39. 



Peshed, scribe, lo. 

Pesibkhenno II, 92, 93. 

Petropulos, Georgios a., Papyri Societatis Archaeo- 
logicae AtheniensiSy Vol. I (reviewed), 177. 
Pewer, tenant-farmer (?), 85; 90, n, 53. 

Phamnute, chief w^orkman, 38. 

Pheni, prophet, 23 ff. 

Phesy, controller, 39. 

Phoenician alphabet, origin of, 170. 

Phonamennakhte, foreigner, 37. 

Pi-Hathor (Pathyris), 36. 

Pi-mehye-w eben, towm, 48. 

Pi-Nebhotep, town, 58, n. 2. 

Pi-shes (Pshes), town, 53, n. 2. 

Pisces, 15 1. 

Pkamen, foreigner, 35, 36; father of herdsman Penhasi, 
33; son of Pwa^amun, 35. 

Pkhal, foreigner, 25 ff., 33 ; brander of cattle, 32. 
Planispheres of Athens and Denderah, 149 ff. 
Pleiades, 150. 

Plutarch, 158. 

Pmerit, scribe, 38 ff. 

Pmerkae(?), scribe, 53. 

Pmershew'ne, scribe, 56. 

Pnakhtemtho, fisherman, 32. 

Pnakhtta, ship’s captain, 61. 

Pneb^apred, scribe, 56. 

Porter, Bertha, death of, 163. 

Pr^aux, Claire, USconomie toy ale des Lagides (re- 
viewed), 174-6. 

Psekhemne, father of Seti, 38 ff., 47.^ 

P-sha-wa^b, unknown locality, 53. 

Psherenptah, high-priest of Memphis, 2. 

Psherinmut, 85; 91, n. 60. 

Psmennakhte, ship’s captain, 40. 

Ptah and Ptah-Soker- Osiris in htp~di~nszv formula, 80. 
Ptahmose, controller, 52, 55; scribe, 54. 

Ptahmy, father of Nebwtot, 59. 

Ptahpdi, father of cultivator Huy (?), 59. 

Ptjeumyeb, father of Pwakhd, 62. 

Ptolemaic gold coins, 135 ff., 161. 

Ptolemais Epitheras, town, 141. 

Ptolemy II, 141. 

Ptolemy III, 141. 

Ptolemy IV, 141, 

Ptolemy V, 141. 

Ptolemy X, 141. 

Pure Land, the, 33. 

Pwa^amun, father of Pkamen, 35. 

Pwakhd, son of Ptjeumyeb, 62. 

Fwer^o, mayor of the West of the City, 24 ff., 30, 31 ; 

deputy-superintendent, 29 ff. 

Pwonesh, deputy-superintendent of the House of 
Suchus, 24. 

Pythagoras, elephant-hunter, 141. 

P>i;hangelos, elephant-hunter, 141. 

Pythoiaos, elephant-hunter, 141. 


Quartermaster of the army, title, 57. 


Ra<ia, overseer of cattle, 53, 55, 56. 

Ramesses II, 14, 17, 44,45; as Sesostris, 138, 139. 
Ramesses III, 5, 14, 15, 17, 43 ff., 72, 125; girdle of, 
118, 121, 122. 

Ramesses IV, 43, 68. 

Ramesses V, 19. 

Ramesses IX, 43. 

Ramesses XI, 23. 

Ra^messenakhte, Steward of Amun, 41 ff. ; overseer of 
hunters, 52; royal scribe, 54, 

Ramesside Love Charm, A, Paul Smither, 131-2. 
Ramesside Texts Relating to the Taxation and Trans- 
port of Corn, Alan H. Gardiner, 19-73. 

Red ink used for amounts of cereals in hieratic, 27, 1 57. 
Redynptah, King’s Treasurer, 75. 

Regiments of Egyptian army, 17, 18. 

Rekhmire^, vizier, 96, 97. 

Rhapta, town, 142. 

Risha, child of the pri\T^ apartment, 57. 

Rokha(?), lady, 52. 

Rome, son of Pen^anuke, 62. 

Royal scribes of the army settled on land, 46. 
Rubbings of Egyptian Monuments made a Hundred 
Years ago. Some, Rosalind Moss, 7-1 i. 


Sacred Staves of Khnum, 61. 

Sacrifice of king, 138 ff. 

Sagittarius, 150. 

Sahtnufe, scribe, 24, 26, 34, 35; cultivator, 29, 30; 
32, n. I. 

Satpehu, stretcher of surveying com, 74, 75. 

Satyros, elephant-hunter, 141. 

Scorpio, 15 1. 

Seat of the Blessed, name of Abydos, 84; 86, n. 3. 
Sebks^ankh, foreigner, 37. 

Seneb, clerk of land, 74, 75. 

Senebteyfey, clerk of land, 74, 75. 

Seoosis, 138. 

Sesebi, The Name of, A. J. Arkell, 159. 

Sesostris, sacrifice of, 138 ff. 

Sesostris I, 2. 

Sesostris III, 76. 

Setekhmose, controller, 53, 55. 

Seth, god, 139, n. 2; 142. 

Sethe, Kurt, Vom Bilde zum Bucks taben. Die Entste^ 
hung der Schrift (reviewed), 169-70. 
Sethiwenmaf, controller, 40. 

Sethos I, 43; sarcophagus of, 10, ii. 

Sethosis called Ramesses, 138. 

Seti, ship’s captain, 38 ff., 47. 

Setmose, ship’s captain, 38; soldier, 71. 

Setnakhte, king, 43. 

Seven Hathors, the, 132. 

Sherden, House of the, unknown locality, 53. 
Sherden mercenaries settled on land, 46. 

Shery, tablet of, 10, ii. 

Ships, owned by Amun of Thebes, 47 ; construction 
of, 158. 

Shopsi, god, 67, 68. 

Shorter, A. W., Review by, 172-3. 

Shoshenk, father of Nemrat, 86; 92, n. 2. 

Shoshenk I, king, son of Nemrat, 84, 92, 93. 

Silver as standard of value, 93, 

Sipar, prince, 10. 

Sirius, ISO, 15 1. 

Slaves, prices of, 94. 

Smen, town, 36. 

Smither, Paul C., A Tax- Assessor’s Journal of the 
Middle Kingdom, 74-6. 

A Ramesside Love Charm, 13 1-2, 

The Tall Story of the Bull, 158-9. 


Spelt, 24, n. 3 ; 27, 28 ; red ink used for amounts in, 

Sphinx as decorative motif y 128, 129. 

Spiegel, Joachim, Die Idee voni Totengericht in der 
dgyptischen Religion (reviewed), 172-3. 
Standard-bearers, 13, 17, 18. 

Standards, military and naval, 12 ff. 

Status constructus of fern, nouns in Coptic compounds, 
44, n. I. 

Stela of Shoshenk, Great Chief of the IVIeshwesh, The, 
A. M. Blackman, 83-95. 

Suchus, House of, 34. 

SzvmnWy early form of town-name Smen, 36. 

Syrians in the Tomb of Amunedjeh, N. M. and N. de 
G. Davies, 96-8. 


Taimhotep, wife of Psherenptah, 2. 

Talamas, garden-owner, 161. 

Tall Story of the Bull, The, Paul C. Smither, 158-9. 
Tamyt, ushabti of, ii. 

Tax -Assessor’s Journal of the Middle Kingdom, A, 
Paul C. Smither, 74-6. 

Taxation, 19 ff., 74 ff* 

Tediese, bondwoman, 85. 

Tedimut, mother of Nestatayt, 85. 

Tekenet, mother of Nemeriu, 85 ; 91, n. 66. 
Tentemu(tet), mother of Tepteramun, 85 ; 91, n. 69. 
Tepteramun, bondwoman, 85; 91, n. 68. 

Tewwer, locality at or near Abydos, 84; 86, n. 6. 
Thinis, location of, 48, n. 4. 

Thoeris, goddess, 142. 

Threshing, 64. 

Threshing-floors, 48, 63. 

Tjanwend, controller, 55. 

Tja^o, priest, 52. 

Tjauemdikhnum (?), 61, n. 9. 

Tjebnet, town, 58, n. 2. 

Tjebu, town, 44, 45, 67. 

Tjuna, town, 58. 

Tod, Marcus N., A Greek Epigram from Egypt, 99- 

Big Game Hunters in Ptolemaic and Roman 
Libya, 159-60. 

Bibliography: Graeco-Roman Egypt, Greek In- 
scriptions (1939-40), i53~6* 

Tukh el-Karamus Gold Hoard, The, J. G. IMilne, 


Tunennehebkhons, metal-engraver, 9, 10. 

Tunic of Tut'ankhamun, The, G. M. Crowtoot and 
N. DE G. Davies, 113-30. 

Turner, Eric G., Catalogue of Greek and Latin Papyri 
and Ostraca in the Possession of the University 
of Aberdeen (review'ed), 176. 

Tut^ankhamun’s Gold Dagger, the Editor, i. 
Tuthmosis III, 17, n. i; 96. 

Tuthmosis IV, 67, 69. 

Typhon, 139. 


Ursa maior, 150; minor, 149, 150. 

Use of Red for Amounts of Cereals in Hieratic, The, 
Battiscombe Gunn, 157. 

Userhet, vizier, 96. 

Usihenakhte, foreigner, 29. 

Usima^re^nakhte, Steward of Amun, 24, 42, 43. 


Wainwright, G. a.. The Attempted Sacrifice of 
Sesostris, 138-43. 

Warships, Egyptian, 18. 

Weaving, 113 ff. 

Wennofrenakhte, commander of ships, 39. 
Wepwawet in htp-di-nsw formula, 80. 

Wheat, 27; red ink used for amounts in, 157. 
Williams, John, inventor of a process of making 
rubbings, 7 ff. 

Winnowing, 64. 

Writing of Htp^Di-NszOy The, C. J. C. Bennett, 157. 

Yetnufe, fisherman, 26, 31. 

Yugaben, foreigner, 35. 

Yuny, chief king’s scribe, 10, ii. 


Zenobia, queen, 161, 





/rr, ‘foreigner’, 25, n. 4. 

/ht nmhtv, ‘tenanted land’, 90, n. 51. 
tWy ‘island’, compared with mod. gezirah, 48. 
itnfj ‘participate in(?)’, 86, n. 9. 
imfhu'y ‘honoured one’, 79. 

imy-r ^h^Wy ‘commander of ships’, ‘admiral’, 47. 
inriy (i) ‘we’, ‘us’; (2) ‘so said we’; (3) ‘if’; (4) ‘if’, 
‘whether’, in indirect questions; (5) ‘except’, 
106 fF. 

ir icn, ‘if’, 112. 
iry-^iy ‘janitor’, 20, 25. 
iry hpy ‘custodian of the regulations’, 76. 
ihzvtyy ‘cultivator’ ; di r ihwtyy ‘put to be a cultivator’, 
21, 22; see also 90, n. 52. 
iskriy ‘sash(?)’, 97, n. 7. 

ity (i) ‘barley’; (2) ‘com’ in general; it-m-it, ‘barley’, 
24, n. 3 ; 27. 

it m, ‘take possession of’, 147, 148. 
f’f 72 ms^y ‘officer of the army’, 87, n. 14. 

sfyty ‘great in dignity’, epithet of Amun, 45, 46. 
(^icnty ‘stick’, 97, n. 8. 
cnty ‘oil-man (?)’, 91, n. 75. 

^rty ‘brewery’; <'rty(?)y ‘brewer*, 91, n. 77. 

‘store’, 35, n. i. 

^gft f m hify ‘its hoof in copper’, expression referring 
to the value of hired cattle (?), 19, n. 3, 
vjp mfcty ‘revealer of tmth’, epithet of Thoth, king and 
vizier, 4, n. 4. 

upt micty ‘dream’, ‘revelation’, 2, 3. 
wpt‘sty ‘details of it’, 29, n. 4; 49. 
zvsdy ‘assent’, 86, n. ii. 
bhty ‘flabellum’, 13. 
bdty ‘spelt’, 24, n. 3 ; 27, 28. 

pfy def. art., in conjunction with nby ‘every’, 87, 
n. 16. 

pf fv hry-iby ‘the middle country’, 59, n. 4. 
p/d nby ‘my lord’, mode of addressing a god, 86, n. 12. 
pcty ‘a kind of land’, 40, n. 7. 
f/yy ‘weight’, ‘value’, ‘amount’, 62, n. 3. 
tn/"-hrzVy ‘justified’, perhaps used of persons connected 
with cult of Osiris, 88, n. 26. 
rm?it Pr-o, ‘a class of Crown lands’, 24. 

7n7iy (i) ‘balance’ in accounts; (2) 'stet(}y above era- 
sures; m mHy ‘at the fixed rate of’, 49, n. 2. 
mh m hmyy ‘scatter the seed(?)’, 20, n. 8. 
mhry ‘magazine’, 24, n. 2. 
mtryy obscure word with bad meaning, 148. 
nhby ‘land recently brought under cultivation*, 65. 
r of futurity omitted, 86, n. 13. 
r-pr, ‘temple’ of secondary rank, 70, n. i. 
rwdwy ‘controller’, 48. 

rmnyty ‘domain’, 41, 42; rmnyt mty, ‘regular domain’, 
46, 47 - 

Rsi^wd/y ‘the Healthy Wakeful One’, epithet of Osiris, 
84; 86, n. 7. 

rdi IjLTy ‘give in addition to’, 89, n. 44. 

h/Wy ‘expenses’, 30, n. 6. 

hry zushty ‘ship’s captain’, 47. 

hty, ‘sergeant’, 87, n. 15. 

h/ n s^y ‘office of the archives’, 89, n. 38. 

h/yy ‘weigh-house (?)’, 32, n. 4. 

h/-t/ Pr-^/y ‘a class of Crown lands’, 23, 24, 28, 32, 
35 - 

h^y ‘appear’, used of accession of kings but not of 
divine manifestations, 4, n. i. 
hh inWy ‘exaction of dues’, 75. 
hb n, ‘take from’, written for hb/ m, 88, n. 22. 
hniy, ‘statue’, written like hnt ‘altar’, 87, n. 19; 94, 
95 - 

bb ‘winnow’, 63, n. 3. 

hii'tJOy ‘platform’ for threshing, 63. 
hUy ‘well(?)’, 90, n. 50. 

hr tpy hr d/d/y ‘beside’, 144, 145 ; see also 2, n. 2. 

hrd n hpy ‘child of the privy apartment’, 57, n. i. 

swty ‘wheat’, 27. 

sphry ‘registration’ of taxes, 20. 

snhyy ‘register’ people, 75. 

sryty ‘standard’, 13. 

shty ‘country’, 87, n. 17. 

%b^by beyond’, ‘overrun’, 39, n. i. 

sdfy ‘land sustained by water (?)’, 90, n. 50. 
s/yty ‘dues’, 20, n. 3. 
s^'yty ‘storeroom’, 24, n. 2; 33, n. 3. 
spy see ssp. 

smyt (masc.), ‘gamer’, 24, n. 2. 
hnv2y (i) ‘harvest’; (2) ‘harvest-tax’, 20. 
hnmty ‘gamer’, 62, n. i. 
snwty ‘granary’, 24, n. 2. 
sSy old ssTy ‘com’, 24, n. 3. 

ssp {sp) «, ‘receive from’, 60, n. 7 ; ssp khkhy ‘attain old 
age’, 86, n. 8. 
sty ‘tax-payers’, 67. 

sd b/kwy ‘exact produce’, 62, n.2;sd diw, ‘withdrawer 
of rations’, 71. 

k/yty ‘arable land of the best quality’, 65. 
krhy ‘tract’, 67. 

^iWy ‘portable shrine’, 29, 69. 
kry ‘boat’, 30, n. 2. 

tp m/Cy ‘accompanying’, ‘escorting’, 146, 147. 
tryty obscure word with bad meaning, 148. 
dmd m sp ‘united’, 86, n. 10. 
dnWy ‘threshing-floor’, 63. 



{Arranged alphabetically) 

A , marginal notation, ‘arrived’, 36, n. 5. 

^ ^ ^ > writing of iptvty, ‘messenger’, 87, n. 16. 

writing of inr, ‘stone’, 89, n. 39. 

^ n ^ j abbreviation of iry-rf^ ‘janitor’, 25. 

colour variations of, 134. 

^ , writing of wpt mfn, ‘dream’, 2, n. 3. 

writing of tcht, ‘village’, 57, n, 2. 

, used for (i) wr, ‘great’ ; (2) mSj ‘lord’, Libyan mss, 
87, n. 20. 

I , abbreviation of Mstvs, 87, n. 20. 

A , abbreviation of mn, ‘balance’, 49, n. 2. 

preceding cardinal numbers perhaps misunder- 
standing of hieratic space-filler, 89, n. 43, 

III 3 marginal notation perhaps meaning ‘feet 
beaten’, 53, n. i, 

Q , late writing of Hr-ivr, mod. Hur, 53,0.3. 

Ac^iii, late writing of hnkt, ‘beer’, 91, n. 80. 


^ i , writing of hfsty, ‘foreigner’, 89, n. 41. 

^ .. . . . , 
a, sportive writing of hr tp, 2, n. 2. 

, ‘charge concerning’, perhaps reads shf r rather 
than strut r, 60, n. 2. 

, ducklings in nest, 133. 

^1, ducks swimming in pool, 133. 

S j writing of U, ‘wear’, ‘adorn’, 131. 
sign depicts a duckling, 133, 134. 

var, hieratic writings of 

py sryt, ‘standard-bearer’, 13. 


‘farm-labourer’, 21, n. 5. 

hr didf, ‘beside’, 144, 145, 


A.non, ‘we’, Egn. inn, 106, no. 

‘store’, Egn. ch^w, 35, n. i. 
fctoTe, ‘spelt’, Egn. hdt, 28. 
iJjuLon, ‘there is not’, Egn. mn<inn wn, in. 
co*yo, ‘wheat’, Egn. swt, 27. 

Toy-, prefix of ist pres., 180, n. 6. 
oyoeie, ‘farm-labourer’, Dem. tozV, 21, n. 5. 

ujtoAx, ‘tribute’, ‘tax’, 20. 

ujO)uj ‘winnow’; pequjwua, ‘winnowxr’, from 

Egn. hh, 63, n. 3. 

^leiT, ^e&e^iT, ‘threshing-floor’, Egn. htiw, 63, 
n. 5. 

‘beside’, Dem. Ar didr, 144, 14:;. 
'xnooy, ‘threshing-floor’, Egn. dnw, 63. 


avaXvoi, used to describe the soul’s migration at death, oXvpa, ‘spelt’, — Egn. bdt, 28. 

, 104* TrpoKOfil^oj, ‘progress’, ‘prosper’, 104. 

Maives, perhaps = Egn. Mhos, 87, n. 20. Twpos, ‘wheat’, = Egn. swt, 27. 

fierddov rys Awn??, ‘set aside your grief’, 10 1. ^dpo?, translated in Coptic by ‘tribute’ ‘tax’ 

liirOSe yooiv, ‘desist from lamentations’, 103. 20. ’ ’ 

Publications of the 



Edouard Naville. Thirteen Plates and Plans. {Fourth and Revised Edition^ i8S8.) 25J, 

II. TANIS, Part I. By \V. M. Flinders Petrie. Seventeen Plates and two Plans. {Second 
Edition^ 18S9.) 2^s. 

IH. NAUKRATIS, Part I. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. With Chapters by Cecil Smith, 

Ernest A. Gardner, and Barclay Y. Head. Forty-four Plates and Plans. {Second Edition, 1888.) 25^. 


Eleven Plates and Plans. {Second Edition^ 255. 

V. TANIS, Part II; including TELL DEFENNF.H (The Biblical ‘Tahpanhes’) and TELL 
NEBESHEH. By W. M. Flinders Petrie, F. Ll. Griffith, and A. S. Murray. Fifty-one Plates 
and Plans. 18SS. {Out of pMUt.) 

VI. NAUKRATIS, Part II. By Ernest A. Gardner and F. Ll. Griffith. Twenty-four Plates 

and Plans. iSSS. {Out of print.) 


el-Yahudiyeh. By Edouard Naville and F. Ll. Griffith. Twenty-six Plates and Plans. 1890. 25J. 

VIII. BUBASTIS. By Edouard Naville. Fifty-four Plates. {Second £di/ion, iSgi.) 25J. 

I a Syllabary). By F. Ll. Griffith. THE GEOGRAPHICAL PAPYRUS (an Almanack). By 
\V. M. F'linders Petrie. With Remarks by Heinrich Brugsch. 1S89. {Out ofprinti) 


Thirty-nine Plates. 1S92 2^s. 

XL AHNAS EL MEDINEH. By Edouard Naville. Eighteen Plates. And THE TOMB 
OF PAHERI AT EL KAB. By J. J. Tylor and F. Ll. Griffith. Ten Plates. 1894. 25J. 

XIL DEIR EL BAHARI, Introductory. By Edouard Naville. Fifteen Plates and Plans. 

1894. 25J. 

XIII. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part 1 . By Edouard Naville. Plates I-XXIV (three coloured) 

with Description. Royal folio. 1S95. 30J. 

XIV. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part IL By Edouard Naville. Plates XXV-LV (two coloured) 

with Description. Royal folio. 1897- 

XV. DESHASHEH. By W. M. F. Petrie. Photogravure and thirty-seven Plates. 1898. 25J. 

XVL DEIR EL BAHARI, Part III. By Edouard Naville. Plates LVI-LXXXVI (two 

coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 1898. 30^-. 

XVII. DENDEREH. By W. )\L Flinders Peirie. Thirty-eight Plates. 1900. 25T. (Forty 

extra Plates of Inscriptions, icr.) 


Sixty-eight Plates. 1900. 2^s. 

XIX. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part IV. By Edouard Naville. Plates LXXXVII-CXVIH (two 

coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 1901. soj. 

XX. DIOSPOLIS PARVA. By W. M. F. Petrie. Forty-nine Plates. 1901. {Oui of print.) 

Petrie. Sixty-three Tlates. 1901. 25J. (Thirty- five extra Plates. Out of print i) 

XX I L ABYDOS, Part I. By W. M. F. Petrie. Eighty-one Plates. 1902. 2^s. 

XXIIL EL AMRAH AND ABYDOS. By D. Randall-MacIver, A. C. Mace, and F. Ll. 

Griffith. Sixty Plates. 1902. 255. 

XXIV. ABYDOS, Part IL By W. M. F. Petrie. Sixty-four Plates. 1903. 25J. 

XXV. ABYDOS, Part III. By C, T. Currelly, E. R. Ayrton, and A. E. P. Weigall, &c. 
Sixty-one Plates. 1904. 25;. 

XXVL EHNASYA. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Forty-three Plates. 1905. 25J. (ROMAN 

EHNASYA. Thirty-two extra Plates, loj.) 

XXVII. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part V. By Edouard Naville. Plates CXIX-CL with Description. 
Royal folio. 1906. 30J. 


Edouard Naville and FI. R. Hall. Thirty-one Plates. 1907. {Out of print.) 

Publications of the Egypt Exploration Society 

XXIX. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part VI. By Edouard Nayille. Plates CLI-CLXXIV (one 

coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 1908. 30J. 


Edouard Naville and Somers Clarke. Twenty*four Plates. 1910. 25^. 


Loat. 1911. 255. 

Edouard Naville, H. R. Hall, and C. T. Currelly. Thirty-six Plates. 1913. 255. 

XXXIII. CEMETERIES OF ABYDOS, Part 1 . By Edouard Naville, T.E. Peet, H, R. Hall, 
and K. Haddon. 1914. 25J. 

XXXIV. CEMETERIES OF ABYDOS, Part II. By T. E. Peet. 1914. 25^. 

XXXV. CEMETERIES OF ABYDOS, Part III. By T. E. Peet and W. L. S.Loat. 1913. 251. 
XXXVL THE INSCRIPTIONS OF SINAI, Parti. By A. H. Gardiner and T. E. Peet. Eighty- 

six Plates and Plans. Royal folio. 1917* 35s. 

XXXVII. BALABISH. By G, A. Wainwright. Twenty-five Plates. 1920. 42s. 

XXXVIII. THE CITY OF AKHENATEN, Part I. By T. E. Peet, C. L. Woolley, B. Gunn, 

P. L. O. Guy, and F. G. Newton. Sixty-four Plates (four coloured). 1923. 42J. 

XXXIX. THE CENOTAPH OF SETI I AT ABYDOS. By H. Frankfort, with chapters by 
A. DE Buck and Battiscombe Gunn. Vol. I, Text; Vol. II, Plates (ninety-three). 1933. 52^. 6 t /. 

XL. THE CITY OF AKHENATEN, Part II. By H. Frankfort and J. D. S. Pendlebury, 

with a chapter by H. W. Fairman. Fifty-eight Plates (one coloured). 1933. 42^. 

XLI. THE BUCHEUM. By Sir Robert Mond and O. H. Myers, with the Hieroglyphic 
Inscriptions edited by H. \V., Vol. I, The Site; Vol. II, The Inscriptions; Vol. Ill, Plates 
(two hundred). 1934. 50^, 

XLIL CEMETERIES OF ARMANT, Part 1 . By Sir Robert Mono and O. H. Myers. Vol. I, 

Text ; Vol. II, Plates (seventy-eight, one coloured). 1938. 25^. 

XLIII. TEMPLES OF ARMANT. By Sir Robert Mono and O. H. Myers. Vol, I, Text; Vol. II, 

Plates (one hundred and seven, three coloured'. 1940. 63s. 


I. BENI HASAN, Part 1 . By Percy E. Newberry. With Plans by G. W. Fraser. Forty-nine 

Plates (four coloured). 1893, {Out of print,) 

II. BENI HASAN, Part IL By Percy E. Newberry. With Appendix, Plans, and Measure- 
ments by G. W. Fraser. Thirty-seven Plates (two coloured). 1894. 25^. 

III. EL BERSHEH, Part I. By Percy E. Newberry. Thirty-four Plates (two coloured). 

1894. 255’. 

IV. EL BERSHEH. Part IL By F. Ll. Griffith and Percy E. Newberry. With Appendix 

by G. W. Fraser. Twenty-three Plates (two coloured). 1895. 25^, 

V. BENI HASAN, Part III. By F. Ll. Griffith. (Hieroglyphs, and IManufacture and Use of 

Flint Knives.) Ten coloured Plates. 1896. 25^. 


FUND. By F. Ll. Griffith. Nine coloured Plates. 1898. 25J. 

VII. BENI HASAN, Part IV. By F. Ll. Griffith. (Illustrating beasts and birds, arts, 

crafts, &c.) Twenty-seven Plates (twenty-one coloured \ 1900. 255. 


By Norman de G. Davies and F. Ll. Griffith. Thirty-one Plates (three coloured). 1900. 255. 


Davies and F. Ll. Griffith. Thiity-five Plates. 1901. 255. 

X. THE ROCK TOMBS OF SHEIKH SAID. By N. de G. Davies. Thirty-five Plates. 

1901. 25^. 


Twenty-seven Plate> (two coloured). 1902. 25^. 

XII. DEIR EL GEBRAWI, Part II, By N. de G. Davies. Thirty Plates (two coloured). 

1902. 25J, 

XIIL THE ROCK TOMBS OF EL AMARNA, Part I. By N. de G. Davies. Forty-one 

Plates. 1903. 25J. 

XIV, EL AMARNA, Part II. By N. de G. Davies. Forty-seven Plates. 1905. 25J. 

XV. EL AMARNA, Part III. By N. de G. Davies. Forty Plates. 1905. 25^. 

Publications of the Egypt Exploration Society 

XVI. EL AMARNA, Part IV. By N. de G. Davies. Forty-five Plates. 1906. 25s. 

XVII. EL AMARNA, Part V. By N. de G. Davies. Forty-four Plates. 1908. 25X. 

XVIII. EL AMARNA, Part VL By N. de G. Davies. Forty-four Plates. 1908. 25.?. 


Part I, by F. Ll. GRIFFITH. Thirty>five Plates. 1911. 25^. 

XX. MEROITIC INSCRIPTIONS, Part II. By F.Ll. Griffith. Forty-eight Plates. 1912. 25^. 

XXL FIVE THEBAN TOMBS. By N. de G. Dames. Forty-three Plates. 1913. 25J. 

XXIL THE ROCK TOMBS OF MEIR, Part I. By A. M. Blackman. Thirty-three Plates. 

1914. 25s, 

XXIII. MEIR, Part II. By A. M, Blackman. Thirty-five Plates. 1915. 25^. 

XXIV. MEIR, Part III. By A. M. Blackman. Thirty-nine Plates. 1915. 25^-. 

XXV. MEIR, Part IV. By A. M. Blackman. Twenty-seven Plates. 1924. 42^. 


with Preface by SiR Robert Mond. Forty-one Plates. 1938. iS^. 


Sixty-two Plates (one coloured). 1939. 2^s. 


I. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part I. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. Eight 

Collotype Plates. 1898. {Out of print.') 

II. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part II. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. Eight 

Collotype Plates. 1S99. 25J. 

III. FA YUM TOWNS AND THEIR PAPYRI. By B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and D. G. 

Hogarth. Eighteen Plates. 1900. 255. 

IV. THE TEBTUNIS PAPYRI, Part 1 . By B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and J. G. Smyly. 

Nine Collotype Plates, 1902. 45.r. {Available for members of the Society only.) 

V. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part III. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. Six 

Collotype Plates. 1903. 255. 

VI. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part IV. By B. P, Grenfell and A. S. FIunt. 

Eight Collotype Plates. 1904. 2^s. 

VII. THE HIBEH PAPYRI, Part I. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. Ten ColIot)pe 

Plates. 1906. 45^. 

VIIL THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part V. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. Seven 

Collotype Plates. 1908. 255. 

IX. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Pan VI. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S, Hunt. Six 

Collotype Plates. 1908. 25J. 

X. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPY^RI, Part VII. By A. S. Hunt. Six Collotype Plates. 

1910. 25^. 

XL THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part Vlll. By A. S. Hunt. Seven Collotype 

Plates. 1911. 25^. 

XIL THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Pari IX. By A. S. Hunt. Six Collotype Platts. 

1912. 25J. 

XIIL THE OXYRHY^NCHUS PAPYRI, Part X. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. Six 

Collotype Plates. 1914- 2 51. 

XIV. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part XL By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 

Seven Collotype Plates. 1915. 2^s. 

XV. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part XII. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. Two 

Collotype Plates. 1916. 25J. 

XVI. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part XIIL By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. Six 

Collotype Plates. 1919. 25J. 

XVII. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part XIV. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 

Three Collotype Plates. 1920. 42J. 

XVIII. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part XV. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 

Five Collotype Plates, 1922. 42^. 

XIX. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part XVI. By B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and 

H. I. Bell. Three Collotype Plates. 1924. 42J. 

XX. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part XVII. By A. S. Hunt. Photogravure and four 
Collotype Plates. 1927. 42^, 

Publications of the Egypt Exploration Society 

XXII. TWO THEOCRITUS PAPYRI. By A. S. Hunt and J. Johnson. Two Collotype 

Plates. 1930. 425. 

XXIIL THE TEBTHNIS PAPYRI, VoL III, Part 1 . By A. S. Hunt and J. G. Smyly. Seven 

Collotj'pe Plates. 1933* {Available for tnemhers of the Society only, 2Ss.) 

XXIV. GREEK SHORTHAND MANUALS. By H. J. M. Milne. Nine Collotype Plates. 

1934. 425. 

XXV. I’HE TEBTUNIS PAPYRI, Vol. Ill, Part 11 . By C. C. Edgar. Four Collotype Plates. 

193^. {Available for members of the Society only, 285.) 

XXVI. THE OXYRHYXCHUS PAPYRI, Part XVIII. By E. Lobel, C.H. Roberts, and E. P. 

Wegener. I'ortrait and fourteen Collot)pe Plates. 1941. 63s. 


ANNUAL ARCH.\E 0 L 0 GICAL REPORTS. Edited by F.Ll. Griffith. 1892-1912. aj.ei/.each. 

General Index, 45. net. 

JOURNALOFEGYPTIAN ARCHAEOLOGY (from 1914). Vols.i-v, 25r.each; the rest sor.each. 
.voriA 1H20Y ; “'Sayings of Our Lord”, from an Early Greek Papyrus. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. 
Hunt. 1S97. {Out of print.) 


Logia” discovered in 1S97. Bv B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 1904 2s. net. 

FR.AGMIiNT OF AN UNCANONICAL GOSPEL. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 1908. 

IS net. 

COPTIC OSTRACA. By W. E. Crum. 1902. {fiut of prini,^ 

THE THEBAN TOMBS SERIES. Edited by Norman de G. Davies and A. H. Gardiner, with 
Plates by Nina de G. Davies. 

Vol. I. THE TOMB OP AM EN EMHET (No. 82). Forty-mne Plates (four coloured). 1915. 355. 

(No. 60). Forty-ei^ht Plates (six colouredL 1920. 425, 

Thirty-ei^^hi Plates (four coloured). 1923. 425, 

Forty Plates (five coloured ). 1926. 505. 

Forty-six Plates 'one coloured,. 1933. 425. 

THE iMAYER PxAPYRI A and B. By T. E. Peet. Twenty-seven Plates. 1920. (Out of print?) 
EGYPTL\N LETTERS TO THE DEAD. By A. H. Gardiner and K. Sethe. 1928. 50.?. 
MURAL PAINTINGS OF EL L\?^IARNA (F. G. Newton Memorial Volume). Edited by 

H. Frankfort. Twenty-one Plates (eight coloured), 1929. 845, 


Edited by S. R. K Glanville. Seventy-foui Plates. 1932. 1055. 

THE TOMB OF THE VIZIER RAMOSE. Mond Excavations at Thebes. Vol. 1 . By N. de G. 

Davies. Fifty-seven Plates (one coloured). 1941. 63J. 


THE TEMPLE OF KING SET HO S I AT ABYDOS. By Amice M. Calverley and Myrtle F. 
Broome ; edited by A H. Gardiner. Small Royal BroadMde. 

Vol. 1. Forty Plates (eight coloured). 1933. ioo5. 

Vol. H. Foity-eight Plates Tour colourc 1935. iooj. 

Vol. III. Sixty-hve Pla: es (thirteen coloured). 193S. 1205. 

The Egypt Exploration Society 

(so styled since 1919) was founded in 1882, and incorporated in 1888 as the ‘Egypt 
Exploration Fund*. 

Ever since its foundation it has made surveys and conducted explorations and 
excavations in Egypt, in accordance with the best methods of scientific investigation, 
for the purpose of obtaining information about the ancient history, religion, arts, 
literatiure, and ethnology of that country. The Society’s activities have recently been 
extended to the exploration of sites of the Pharaonic Period in the Sudan. 

Those of the antiquities discovered which are not retained, according to law, by 
the Antiquities Departments of Egypt and the Sudan are exhibited in London every 
year and are then distributed among public museums in the United Kingdom, the 
British Dominions, the United States of America, and elsewhere, in strict proportion 
to the contributions from each locality. 

All persons interested in the promotion of the Society’s objects are eligible for 
election as Members. The entrance fee hitherto payable has been suspended until 
further notice. The annual subscription is {^2. 2s. to the London Office, or $10.00 to 
the American Office (see below), due on ist January. 

Members have the right of attendance and voting at all meetings, and may intro- 
duce friends to the Lectures and Exhibitions of the Society. They have access to the 
Library at the Society’s Rooms in London, and may borrow books. 

The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology or, alternatively, a Graeco-Roman 
Memoir, is presented gratis to all Members, and other publications may be purchased 
by them at a substantial discount. 

Subject to certain conditions, of which details may be had on application, all 
students between the ages of fifteen and twenty-five are eligible for election as Asso- 
ciate Members. Associate Members receive the Journal, gratis and post free, and 
enjoy all other privileges of membership except the right to vote at meetings. The 
annual subscription for Associate Members is 105. 6 d. to the London Office, or $2.50 
to the American Office. 

Persons may also join the Society as Associates at an annual subscription of js. 6 d. 
to the London Office. Associates are entitled to receive the Aimual Report and tickets 
for lectmes and exhibitions, and to use the Library in London, but not to take out 

Full particulars may be. obtained Street, ^Manchester 

Square, London, W. i,^ b, A. S. Arnold, 

Esq., P.O. Box 71, Mf 

Id be sent to 
Chester. All 

d be sent to 
inde Street, 

fey, U.S.A. 






the Editor, Dr. A 
books for review s| 
Society, 2 Hinde S 

All subscriptiod 
the Honorary Tuq 
Manchester Square, 


**A booh {hat is shvt isbvta block*' 

^ Department of Archaeology 


Please help ns to keep the book 

* Ti rd woviP L 






Oxford Uxis^rsity Press, amfx holsf, Warwick sq., E.C. 4, and 114 fifth avenue, nw York, U.S.A; 
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, BENTLEY house, 200 euston road, London, N.W.l; 

GEORGE SALBV, 65 great rl’ssell st., W.C. I